Mailing-List: contact users-help@jackrabbit.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: users@jackrabbit.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (asf.osuosl.org: domain of edgarpoce@gmail.com designates
 66.249.92.172 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws;
        s=beta; d=gmail.com;
        h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references;
        b=R+fb0snBNcLhGm05z0pqbiZsOt6le1/i2fe9I4XhXRpzCo/JzBLSYDTYiBDIvMNlPK8/D9phyB2y+/ySX6xMHKPChRdlkYaUycRZZsDpx1HYU0ee6LckGY2udTG71Q8y9P02SiczXsknA9y9/Tsumak0BZoQ3JRhZVuNoBsgeds=
Message-ID: <8a83c96b0606280931k20d88e9cg501420327ca56742@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2006 13:31:06 -0300
From: "Edgar Poce" <edgarpoce@gmail.com>
To: users@jackrabbit.apache.org
Subject: Re: Newbie Question - Performance
In-Reply-To: <3ed4376e0606280917v5a664491n887c86742c1aa746@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <3ed4376e0606280917v5a664491n887c86742c1aa746@mail.gmail.com>

Hi,

On 6/28/06, Vijay Pandey <vijay.k.pandey@gmail.com> wrote:
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>  it's a good practice to share a single anonymous session for read only
> access if possible, it would reduce the time that write actions will take.
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
>

it's not thread safe, I think you should pool the connections somehow.
btw, I think that comment is out of date, I'll remove it. AFAIK it's
been a while since transient items are shared among read only
sessions.

br,
edgar

> Does it mean to say that 'session' is thread safe at method level for read
> only operations , or do we have to synchronize the call on session? or do
> you think should we have a pool of read only sessions ?
>
> Thanks
>  Vijay
>
>