Mailing-List: contact dev-help@jackrabbit.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@jackrabbit.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (herse.apache.org: domain of shane.preater@googlemail.com
 designates 64.233.162.236 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=googlemail.com; s=beta;
        h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references;
        b=ljUuxMtyI8H+6o8/XO8wmc14meLYKcA7dLQRV6ANNyQQjHHPhVA/ugyCh3r8LbQn344cIi7qS+Hz4028AkPoAEQbzfyYEgFREpQdwb9C3rkR96Qu+/8c0jns8sVMq4wsR/u1ZJUwQEa3axgnwGJgJX2OmCuZW4Ar2Excg8Wemmg=
Message-ID: <64cf6d8b0703150320o630380fag8887a5eabd8eed18@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2007 10:20:29 +0000
From: "Shane Preater" <shane.preater@googlemail.com>
To: dev@jackrabbit.apache.org, tobias.bocanegra@day.com
Subject: Re: Possible deadlock of jcr-server 1.2.1 (rmi)
In-Reply-To: <8be731880703150241y6d7a9c45o6d2b4089bfc031a2@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_Part_24018_2889171.1173954029514"
References: <E5E9E9A0-6164-4E06-BE22-8C1C5435BFB6@denali.be>
	 <45F7B6AD.70101@gmx.net>
	 <510143ac0703140155r54caaf58h7cfc17500bdd36e4@mail.gmail.com>
	 <9f929f1c0703140339m7d12ca6lbb1f8d865cc6fe6e@mail.gmail.com>
	 <8be731880703140357g19b06745h2a7fd53eaa47a868@mail.gmail.com>
	 <64cf6d8b0703141621v51ad75efh86372f18160336f7@mail.gmail.com>
	 <8be731880703150241y6d7a9c45o6d2b4089bfc031a2@mail.gmail.com>

------=_Part_24018_2889171.1173954029514
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

Thanks for that Tobias.

We have now implemented the fix proposed by Marcel and this has sorted out
our dead lock issue (Based on the tests we created to verify that our issues
were the same as that found by Olivier) so if anyone else is experiencing
this issue then Marcel's fix is the way to go temporarily.

Regards,
Shane.

On 15/03/07, Tobias Bocanegra <tobias.bocanegra@day.com> wrote:
>
> hi,
> a quick search in jira shows that the following issues deal with
> deadlocked repositories:
>
> http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCR-546
> http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCR-672
> http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCR-447
> http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCR-443
> http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCR-335
>
> the hacks i mentioned earlier where fixes for some of those issues.
> the solution that marcel proposed seems reasonable and could help
> solving this issues in the  short run.
>
> regards, toby
>
> On 3/15/07, Shane Preater <shane.preater@googlemail.com> wrote:
> > Tobias,
> > We are also experiencing this problem with deadlocks on our system could
> you
> > outline the "hacks" you have used to fix this issue. We are using
> versioning
> > in a production environment so if we need to hack it temporarily to get
> over
> > this issue then so be it for the moment.
> >
> > Also I will keep an eye on the JIRA issue for when the proper fix is
> > implemented.
> >
> > Thanks very much,
> > Shane.
> >
> >
> > On 14/03/07, Tobias Bocanegra <tobias.bocanegra@day.com> wrote:
> > > hi,
> > > we analyzed the issue several times and most of the fixes were hacks
> > > to prevent deadlocks and data corruption.
> > > imo, we can't fixed the transaction/concurrency issues that occur
> > > together with versioning without a bigger redesign of some of the core
> > > parts of jackrabbit.
> > >
> > > regards, toby
> > >
> > > On 3/14/07, Miro Walker <miro.walker@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > We've been aware of this issue for a while. Unfortunately, the
> locking
> > > > implementation is pretty hard to disentangle, and we haven't been
> able
> > > > to come up with a fix. However, we have been able to work around it
> by
> > > > adding an extra level of synchronisation in our own application that
> > > > ensures only one simultaneous versioning operation can occur. I
> guess
> > > > it depends how big a hit this would be as to whether it would be a
> > > > suitable solution for anyone else.
> > > >
> > > > Miro
> > > >
> > > > On 3/14/07, Jukka Zitting <jukka.zitting@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > Hi,
> > > > >
> > > > > Seems like another case of the age-old JCR-18 issue with
> concurrent
> > > > > versioning. Both of the updates contain some versioning
> operations,
> > > > > and since concurrent versioning is at the moment still a rather
> > > > > dangerous sport, I'm not surprised if bad things like a deadlock
> can
> > > > > occur.
> > > > >
> > > > > Any contributions in further diagnosing and resolving the
> concurrent
> > > > > versioning issues would be very much appreciated!
> > > > >
> > > > > BR,
> > > > >
> > > > > Jukka Zitting
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > -----------------------------------------<
> > tobias.bocanegra@day.com >---
> > > Tobias Bocanegra, Day Management AG, Barfuesserplatz 6, CH - 4001
> Basel
> > > T +41 61 226 98 98, F +41 61 226 98 97
> > > -----------------------------------------------<
> > http://www.day.com >---
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> -----------------------------------------< tobias.bocanegra@day.com >---
> Tobias Bocanegra, Day Management AG, Barfuesserplatz 6, CH - 4001 Basel
> T +41 61 226 98 98, F +41 61 226 98 97
> -----------------------------------------------< http://www.day.com >---
>

------=_Part_24018_2889171.1173954029514--