[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCR-890?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#action_12524261
]
Thomas Mueller commented on JCR-890:
------------------------------------
In a many cases, parameters can be processed outside the synchronized block.
Also, I would catch throwables and convert them to RepositoryExceptions, or at
least log them:
public void someMethod(parameters) throws RepositoryException {
try {
log(...)
prepare parameters
synchronized (session) {
// do something
}
} catch (Throwable e) {
throw logAndConvert(e);
}
}
> effort to look at synchronization within the lower levels of Jackrabbit?
Why not. In my view testing with specific use cases / benchmarks helps a lot to
find improvements.
Thomas
> concurrent read-only access to a session
> ----------------------------------------
>
> Key: JCR-890
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCR-890
> Project: Jackrabbit
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: core
> Reporter: David Nuescheler
> Assignee: Stefan Guggisberg
>
> Even though the JCR specification does not make a statement about Sessions
> shared across a number of threads I think it would be great for many
> applications if we could state that sharing a read-only session is supported
> by Jackrabbit.
> On many occasions in the mailing lists we stated that there should not be an
> issue with sharing a read-only session, however I think it has never been
> thoroughly tested or even specified as a "design goal".
> If we can come to an agreement that this is desirable I think it would be
> great to start including testcases to validate that behaviour and update the
> documentation respectively.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
