[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KARAF-1572?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13403224#comment-13403224
]
Claudio Corsi commented on KARAF-1572:
--------------------------------------
I was looking at how the current jdbc lock mechanism is implemented and it
seems like it isn't generic enough to me.
I have created something different that uses simple select, insert and update
calls without the need to open a long running transaction. I find that to be
overkill when the only transaction that should be opened is when you are
creating the tables and initial row{s}.
I have successfully tested this using derby and will be trying it with other
database systems.
I would like purpose this new jdbc locking mechanism as another option that
users can use on top of what you've already implemented.
The solution does not use the FOR UPDATE requirement which is not necessarily
implemented by all databases but uses definitions that are available with all
database systems, including SQL Server.
My question then is, do you want me to include the new feature to this ticket
or should I create a new ticket instead?
> Add SQL Server Support for JDBC Lock
> -------------------------------------
>
> Key: KARAF-1572
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KARAF-1572
> Project: Karaf
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: karaf-instance
> Affects Versions: 2.2.7
> Reporter: Claudio Corsi
> Fix For: 2.2.9, 2.3.0, 3.1.0
>
>
> The current JDBCLock implementations do not work when using Microsoft SQL
> Server since this requires that you use a CURSOR with the SELECT statement.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
