db-torque-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From T E Schmitz <mail...@numerixtechnology.de>
Subject Re: deprecate lockTable() and unlockTable() methods in adapter
Date Mon, 28 Mar 2005 11:40:27 GMT
Thomas Fischer wrote:
> it seems that everything in Torque is used by somebody - no chance to clear
> up ;-)
> Ok, I will not do it.

I'll let you know when I stop using it.

> By the way, why do you need to lock tables ? I thought postgresql is
> capable of serializable transactions. In my experience, locking is only
> needed if one does not have serializable transactions (or does not want to
> use them).

I believe that "serializable" is the postgresql default but I am not 
setting it exxplicitly in my Torque.properties file: It's ages ago since 
  I set up the properties file but I remember that a handful of settings 
caused a warning in Torque and I've never managed to clear this up:


> T E Schmitz <mailreg@numerixtechnology.de> schrieb am 28.03.2005 12:53:16:
>>Hello Thomas,
>>Thomas Fischer wrote:
>>>I have noticed that the adapter contains two methods, lockTable() and
>>>unlockTable(), which are not used by Torque (anymore ?). The
> implementation
>>>of these methods is in some cases not existant, in other cases
> questionable
>>>(e.g. in Oracle, tables are unlocked by a commit, so the unlockTable
> does a
>>>commit, which is not at all the expected behaviour.)
>>>It seems that locking and unlocking a table cannot be made to look the
> same
>>>over all Dbs. To reflect this, I would like to deprecate these methods
> in
>>>order to remove them in a future release (Torque 3.3 at the soonest).
> Any
>>>objections ?
>>Yes - I am using them. Although: I wish I had a better concept avoiding
>>lock table for my particular scenario.



Tarlika Elisabeth Schmitz

To unsubscribe, e-mail: torque-dev-unsubscribe@db.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: torque-dev-help@db.apache.org

View raw message