On 30.11.11 14:27, "Felix Meschberger" 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Am 30.11.2011 um 14:20 schrieb Michael Dürig:
That's a different story for a different thread ;-) In a nutshell: under
snapshot isolation sessions will see ADD events for items which do not
exist for them. OTHO when they get an DELETE event the item will still
exist for them. Note how this is reverse from the situation in JR2.

Hmm, this will probably effectively break many if not most current 
ObservationListener implementations. Good to know.

I expect there is a lot of code outside that relies on the copy-on-write nature 
of JR 2 - i.e. that anything the session did not touch yet is always "live". 
Introducing snapshot isolation (which would be copy-on-read IIUC) would break 
those cases (but usually these errors will depend on concurrency, thus hard to 
spot).

Now looking at the specs, I am confused: in JCR 1.0 it was up to the 
implementation to be using copy-on-read or copy-on-write [0]. In JCR 2.0 that 
text was replaced by [1] (IIUC, didn't find anything else) which seems to be 
defining copy-on-write as the standard behavior now:

"A change that is persisted is visible to all other sessions bound to the same 
persistent workspace that have sufficient read permission."

That would mean that JR 3 cannot do snapshot isolation! But I might be missing 
something...

[0] 
http://www.day.com/specs/jcr/1.0/7.1.3.4_Seeing_Changes_Made_by_Other_Sessions.html
[1] 
http://www.day.com/specs/jcr/2.0/10_Writing.html#10.1.4%20Visibility%20of%20Changes

Cheers,
Alex

--
Alexander Klimetschek
Developer // Adobe (Day) // Berlin - Basel

Reply via email to