jackrabbit-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Marcel Reutegger (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] Commented: (JCR-2696) Allow to use an other queue type then FIFO for requests
Date Wed, 04 Aug 2010 07:24:17 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCR-2696?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12895167#action_12895167

Marcel Reutegger commented on JCR-2696:

There are already two strategies to choose from for the locking in the SharedItemStateManager:
DefaultISMLocking and FineGrainedISMLocking (see JCR-314). The first will lock the complete
tree while a write is going one, while the latter will only block the set of items that are
affected by the current commit. Commits are serialized (I guess that's what you mean with
FIFO) in both cases. Please note that this only covers the locking inside the SharedItemStateManager
and you might still end up having reads locked by writes in the persistence manager implementation,
which is IIRC true for all implementations we currently have.

> Allow to use an other queue type then FIFO for requests
> -------------------------------------------------------
>                 Key: JCR-2696
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCR-2696
>             Project: Jackrabbit Content Repository
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>            Reporter: Norman Maurer
> Sometimes it would be nice to be able to give reads a higher priority then writes ( because
writes block the whole jcr tree). Thats not possible atm, all requests are handled in FIFO-fashion.
I think it would make sense to allow to use other strategies.

This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.

View raw message