Thanks for that Tobias. We have now implemented the fix proposed by Marcel and this has sorted out our dead lock issue (Based on the tests we created to verify that our issues were the same as that found by Olivier) so if anyone else is experiencing this issue then Marcel's fix is the way to go temporarily.
Regards, Shane. On 15/03/07, Tobias Bocanegra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
hi, a quick search in jira shows that the following issues deal with deadlocked repositories: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCR-546 http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCR-672 http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCR-447 http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCR-443 http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCR-335 the hacks i mentioned earlier where fixes for some of those issues. the solution that marcel proposed seems reasonable and could help solving this issues in the short run. regards, toby On 3/15/07, Shane Preater <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Tobias, > We are also experiencing this problem with deadlocks on our system could you > outline the "hacks" you have used to fix this issue. We are using versioning > in a production environment so if we need to hack it temporarily to get over > this issue then so be it for the moment. > > Also I will keep an eye on the JIRA issue for when the proper fix is > implemented. > > Thanks very much, > Shane. > > > On 14/03/07, Tobias Bocanegra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > hi, > > we analyzed the issue several times and most of the fixes were hacks > > to prevent deadlocks and data corruption. > > imo, we can't fixed the transaction/concurrency issues that occur > > together with versioning without a bigger redesign of some of the core > > parts of jackrabbit. > > > > regards, toby > > > > On 3/14/07, Miro Walker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > We've been aware of this issue for a while. Unfortunately, the locking > > > implementation is pretty hard to disentangle, and we haven't been able > > > to come up with a fix. However, we have been able to work around it by > > > adding an extra level of synchronisation in our own application that > > > ensures only one simultaneous versioning operation can occur. I guess > > > it depends how big a hit this would be as to whether it would be a > > > suitable solution for anyone else. > > > > > > Miro > > > > > > On 3/14/07, Jukka Zitting <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > Seems like another case of the age-old JCR-18 issue with concurrent > > > > versioning. Both of the updates contain some versioning operations, > > > > and since concurrent versioning is at the moment still a rather > > > > dangerous sport, I'm not surprised if bad things like a deadlock can > > > > occur. > > > > > > > > Any contributions in further diagnosing and resolving the concurrent > > > > versioning issues would be very much appreciated! > > > > > > > > BR, > > > > > > > > Jukka Zitting > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > -----------------------------------------< > [EMAIL PROTECTED] >--- > > Tobias Bocanegra, Day Management AG, Barfuesserplatz 6, CH - 4001 Basel > > T +41 61 226 98 98, F +41 61 226 98 97 > > -----------------------------------------------< > http://www.day.com >--- > > > > -- -----------------------------------------< [EMAIL PROTECTED] >--- Tobias Bocanegra, Day Management AG, Barfuesserplatz 6, CH - 4001 Basel T +41 61 226 98 98, F +41 61 226 98 97 -----------------------------------------------< http://www.day.com >---
