Aaron (or others), Do you have any updates from your experiences using JDO with threadsafe enabled? Has your synchronization changes eliminated these errors? Is it necessary to synchronize reads such as query.execute and pm.detachCopyAll in additional to the write operations such as pm.deletePersistent and pm.makePersistent?
Thank you, David On May 17, 4:51 pm, Aaron Shepherd <[email protected]> wrote: > Ok. My change to PMF.java to synchronize the get of the > PersistenceManager did NOT correct the problem. > > Going to fallback to synchronizing every usage of the > PersistenceManager (reads and writes). <sigh/> > > Will update this issue with any further results. > > On May 17, 1:54 am, Stephen Johnson <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Ah, I missed the point about it being tasks and didn't realize the > > threadsafe only applied to user requests and not tasks. If indeed that was > > the case. > > > On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 10:44 PM, Juha K <[email protected]> wrote: > > > The datanucleus issue has a comment "Then, when my tasks run in parallel, > > > initialisation has already been done and the problem doesn't appear any > > > more.", so before the threadsafe property, only tasks were run in > > > parallel. > > > Probably that's why I didn't see this error before, I didn't have tasks > > > doing db access. > > > > -- > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > > > "Google App Engine for Java" group. > > > To post to this group, send email to > > > [email protected]. > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > > > [email protected]. > > > For more options, visit this group at > > >http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine-java?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google App Engine for Java" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine-java?hl=en.
