Ah, I see! So for instance the abstract notion of "owner" detached from thread
can enable things like locks migrating across threads. That's very interesting.
Thanks Oliver,
Aaron
Oliver Zeigermann wrote:
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]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
