sszuev commented on issue #1961:
URL: https://github.com/apache/jena/issues/1961#issuecomment-1890999254

   @afs 
   
   > Is that stacktrace for the GraphTxn case? I can't see where the "find" 
step is.
   
   yes. you can find code here: https://github.com/sszuev/concurrent-rdf-graph 
   and run tests against 4.10.0 and 5.0.0-SNAPSHOT.
   Usually if some functionality worked well in a previous version and no 
longer works in the next version, it may be a regression.
   
   The stacktrace above is from single-thread test in a scenario where read 
operations followed by write one
   
https://github.com/sszuev/concurrent-rdf-graph/blob/main/src/test/kotlin/scenarious/CommonScenarios.kt#L98
 
   There is no transactional blocks in tests, no explicit closing iterator, but 
every read operation is closing implicitly by terminal operations like `toList`.
   
   @arne-bdt 
   I can try to adapt tests and benchmarks to use transactional mechanism and 
`ExtendedIterator#close`. 
   Provided by  concurrent-rdf-graph  project concurrent implementations do not 
require such mechanisms (more precisely, `close` is still required for 
"short-circuiting terminal operations" like `findFirst`).
   For adapting I can use some kind of graph-wrapper with no-opt transactional 
mechanism for my implementations. 
   
   __________
   Let me remind that I have neither implementations nor tests of a 
full-fledged ACID. 
   The goal of the project is to provide thread-safe implementations, but any 
transaction graph must also be thread-safe. 
   Therefore, comparison of such graphs is quite correct.
   


-- 
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

Reply via email to