[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCR-1552?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12592052#action_12592052
]
Stefan Guggisberg commented on JCR-1552:
----------------------------------------
> > this special case can be compared with the scenario where 2 sessions are
> creating
> > conflicting child nodes (SNS not allowed). in this case the implementation
> does throw
> > an exception (which is IMO not only correct but also mandated by the spec).
>
> These cases are IMHO not equivalent. Creating a child node is like a INSERT
> statement in a database, where as setting a property is more like an UPDATE
> statement on an existing row. Concurrently creating two child nodes with the
> same name is like two database clients trying to INSERT a row with the same
> primary key -> the other one should fail. But concurrently setting a property
> is more like two clients executing an UPDATE on the same row. Unless there's
> an isolation level violation there's no reason why both clients shouldn't
> succeed, even if a column was NULL or either one of the clients sets it to
> NULL.
hmmm, still not fully convinced but you've got a good point here :)
> Concurrent conflicting property creation sometimes doesn't fail
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: JCR-1552
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCR-1552
> Project: Jackrabbit
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: jackrabbit-core
> Affects Versions: core 1.4.2
> Reporter: Thomas Mueller
> Assignee: Stefan Guggisberg
> Fix For: 1.5
>
>
> The following test prints "Success":
> Session s1 = ...
> Session s2 = ...
> s1.getRootNode().setProperty("b", "0"); // init with zero
> s1.getRootNode().setProperty("b", (String) null); // delete
> s1.save();
> s1.getRootNode().setProperty("b", "1");
> s2.getRootNode().setProperty("b", "2");
> s1.save();
> s2.save();
> System.out.println("Success");
> However if the line marked "... // delete" is commented out,
> it fails with the following exception:
> javax.jcr.InvalidItemStateException:
> cafebabe-cafe-babe-cafe-babecafebabe/{}b: the item cannot be saved
> because it has been modified externally.
> at
> org.apache.jackrabbit.core.ItemImpl.getTransientStates(ItemImpl.java:246)
> at org.apache.jackrabbit.core.ItemImpl.save(ItemImpl.java:928)
> at org.apache.jackrabbit.core.SessionImpl.save(SessionImpl.java:849)
> It should fail in all cases. If we decide it shouldn't fail, it needs to be
> documented.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
