jackrabbit-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Jukka Zitting" <jukka.zitt...@gmail.com>
Subject Status of concurrent versioning (Was: Re: concurrent writes (JCR-314))
Date Mon, 25 Jun 2007 14:31:55 GMT
Hi,

[Taking the thread to dev@]

On 6/25/07, Marcel Reutegger <marcel.reutegger@gmx.net> wrote:
> Pablo Rios wrote:
> > Regarding the steps below required to support concurrent writes, what
> > considerations should be taken into account in connection with JCR-18 issue ?
>
> IMO JCR-18 should be closed as fixed and new issues should be created as new
> deadlocks are observed. e.g. JCR-962.
>
> as jackrabbit evolved, new synchronization and locking was added to the core. I
> think their usage should be reviewed and changed accordingly. most important,
> the sequence when locks are acquired.

What's the general feeling about concurrent versioning? Do we have
light at the end of the tunnel? I guess reviewing whether JCR-18 is
still relevant would make sense

At the moment my standard recommendation for versioning operations in
concurrent environments is to use guard code like this (AFAIK
concurrent normal workspace access doesn't interfere with versioning):

    synchronized (repository) {
        // versioning operations
    }

It would be very nice if we could drop those synchronization block.

BR,

Jukka Zitting

Mime
View raw message