jackrabbit-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From IvanLatysh <i...@yourmail.com>
Subject Re: Isolation level inconsistency.
Date Fri, 20 Jul 2007 17:20:38 GMT
Jukka Zitting wrote:

> Would you design a relational database client that leaves a
> transaction open like that for extended amounts of time? I don't think
> that's best practice.
It is not - for majority use-cases but in limited resource environment it is.
And yes it is cheaper to re-use and keep open session rather than produce 
garbage. Jukka have you tried to write something when you have 64k heap ?

And to minimize application footprint I will consider keep session alive for 
standalone and embedded applications, if it make sense.

> In fact I think JCR is better suited for managing such long-lived
> draft content for the very reason that the transient changes are
> clearly separate from the persistent storage and can be handled
> entirely on the client side of a client-server model. A relational
> database typically (at least) write-locks all rows that are being
> modified in a transaction.
It depends on your isolation level, and often they are not locked, that will 
bring concurrent modification issues, but it is a different topic :) I will 
stick to our issues.

-- 
Ivan Latysh
ivan@yourmail.com

Mime
View raw message