On 6/27/05, Aaron Hamid <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I will use Thread.currentThread() for the "owner". I'm not clear as to the > utility of non-thread owners...what is the semantics of synchronization if > the owners are not threads? Or is the intention that owners ultimately must > be associated with unique threads?
If something is actually blocked, it of course is the thread. But the thread that does something on behalf of a therad owner may change, e.g. when a transaction is suspended in one thread and resumed in another. In something like JTA you will have to tell the TM about this, in commons transaction you will not have to. Oliver --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
