Hi
who ever it was, said:
> > I'm thinking of the isolation level as an immutable part of the
> > transaction - partly because this is how the databases implement it (at
> > least as far as JDBC goes).
> >
> > Sure, it would be useful to be able to specify different levels per
> > bean, but given the apparent constraints that the databases are putting
> > us under, implementing it against the database isn't feasable.
> >
Bill Burke answered:
> Just use a freakin' different connection pool for different beans and
there
> is no freakin' database constraint.
That would cause a problem with transactions and not XA compliant
JDBC drivers, wouldn't it? The reason why JBoss pool pickes a
connection from the pool based on the TX (reuses a connection
with a TX when another connection is requested in the same TX)
is, because current drivers often have a one to one correspondence
between connection and transaction (as of comments in JBoss pool).
As a result, when you wanted to switch isolation inside one TX the
CMP code had to issue 'SET ISOLATION whatever' (or similar syntax
for non Informix DBs), the JDBC call setTransactionIsolation()
most probably can't be used, as it seems to behave ANSI like
(does not allow switching inside a TX as of java.sql.Connection
docs).
regards
Georg
___ ___
| + | |__ Georg Rehfeld Woltmanstr. 12 20097 Hamburg
|_|_\ |___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] +49 (40) 23 53 27 10
_______________________________________________
Jboss-development mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
