Just to follow track and in some one is interested! > Mr. Bela Ban > > Hi! > > I have posted this in the forum if you prefer to answer there. > > I am implementing a version of JBCache using optimistic locking, > following the indications presented in the forum and in the docs i found > in the distribution. > > So far I add: > - an aspect to intercept the behavior of findNode(fqn) > - I add an Interceptor to manage creation of nodes in the workspace when > a put method is invoked. > - I also add a call interceptor that avoids the chain of interceptors > when i am in optimistic mode and i am not preparing or commiting.
Are you doing this on CVS head, or on 1.2 ? > Now I have this questions: > 1. My first draft design attempt to update all the caches is the cluster > but the one performing the operation, this because prepare and commits > avoid self :( . Any clues here? On TX commit ? > 2. I am not sure if i have to add the nodes that i have to lock to the > list of the transaction, so far i am only adding the operations. I hope > this will work :( . Is this ok? the documentation talks that they are > using for unloking/ abort, the other nodes need this list or they make > their own list? > Mr. Bela Ban > > Hi! > > I have posted this in the forum if you prefer to answer there. > > I am implementing a version of JBCache using optimistic locking, > following the indications presented in the forum and in the docs i found > in the distribution. > > So far I add: > - an aspect to intercept the behavior of findNode(fqn) > - I add an Interceptor to manage creation of nodes in the workspace when > a put method is invoked. > - I also add a call interceptor that avoids the chain of interceptors > when i am in optimistic mode and i am not preparing or commiting. Are you doing this on CVS head, or on 1.2 ? > Now I have this questions: > 1. My first draft design attempt to update all the caches is the cluster > but the one performing the operation, this because prepare and commits > avoid self :( . Any clues here? On TX commit ? > 2. I am not sure if i have to add the nodes that i have to lock to the > list of the transaction, so far i am only adding the operations. I hope > this will work :( . Is this ok? the documentation talks that they are > using for unloking/ abort, the other nodes need this list or they make > their own list? Don't know, this is your design decision > 3. This topic seems like dead in the forum..are you using other media to > discuss this? a mail list? No, the forum (JBossCache) is the right place. Do you have any design documents regarding this ? Don't know, this is your design decision > 3. This topic seems like dead in the forum..are you using other media to > discuss this? a mail list? No, the forum (JBossCache) is the right place. Do you have any design documents regarding this ? View the original post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=3867292#3867292 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=3867292 ------------------------------------------------------- SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users. Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=6595&alloc_id=14396&op=click _______________________________________________ JBoss-Development mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
