jackrabbit-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Alexandru Popescu ☀" <the.mindstorm.mailingl...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: concurrent writes (JCR-314)
Date Mon, 04 Jun 2007 22:07:45 GMT
On 6/5/07, Oliver Zeigermann <oliver@zeigermann.de> wrote:
> 2007/6/4, Alexandru Popescu ☀ <the.mindstorm.mailinglist@gmail.com>:
> > On 6/4/07, Oliver Zeigermann <oliver@zeigermann.de> wrote:
> > > I am not deeply into the problem, but why is there locking on the Java
> > > side anyway? It really should be possible to get along with DB locks
> > > only.
> > >
> > > Calling the DB from synchronized blocks always bears the danger of deadlocks.
> > >
> >
> > Basically because the implementation of JCR is not required to work on
> > top of a RDBMS. Moreover, the persistence managers have been usually
> > created to be used over different persistence solutions (and over
> > different RDBMS, which have different locking support/mechanisms).
>
> If that is so, concurrency code really should be inside the individual
> persistence solutions and not inside the Jackrabbit core. If it is,
> there always is a deadlock hazard.
>

It is. Maybe before going further you should check the code. If you
have some suggestions I guess everybody would be happy to hear about
different approaches.

./alex
--
.w( the_mindstorm )p.

> The way to go would be to remove synchronization from Jackrabbits core.
>
> What do you say?
>
> Oliver
>
Mime
View raw message