Mike Matrigali <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Knut Anders Hatlen wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I think I once read that the engine code in some cases uses >> synchronized containers because the code was written before the >> unsynchronized containers were added to the JDK, and not because >> synchronization was needed. Is that correct? > yes, of course one needs to check as it may be the case that sync is needed.
Thanks, I have logged DERBY-2149 to replace synchronized collections with unsynchronized ones in RAMTransaction, and DERBY-2150 to investigate whether it is safe in GenericLanguageConnectionContext. -- Knut Anders
