openjpa-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Michael Dick <michael.d.d...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: @Version for sqlserver "timpstamp" datatype
Date Fri, 15 Apr 2011 14:22:26 GMT
Hi Chintan,

Implicit locking is not the same as optimistic locking.

By implicit locking I meant the database locks which are obtained
automatically when you obtain a connection. This level of locking depends on
the isolation level in use. I probably should have referred to it as
isolation level locking to avoid confusion.

I'm doing a little guessing here, I don't know that the isolation level is
the cause of the lock timeout, it just looks likely since there's no sign of
OpenJPA locking the table (the UPDLOCK statement).

Hope this helps,
-mike

On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 5:56 PM, chintan4181 <chintan4181@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Mike,
>
> Implicit locking is same as Optimistic locking?
>
> ~chintan
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://openjpa.208410.n2.nabble.com/Version-for-sqlserver-timpstamp-datatype-tp6267241p6274638.html
> Sent from the OpenJPA Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message