Hi,
Don't worry about the LOCKING-WAITING (TRANSACTION)
message. Like Simon said, this is simply a warning
that the container is waiting to avoid reentry of
a bean.
Back to original topic:
Yes, this scenario will result in a deadlock, but
as soon as one of the transactions time out, the
other will continue and the deadlock will be over.
Best Regards,
Ole Husgaard.
"Nortje, Andrew" wrote:
>
> I started a thread on Friday regarding the LOCKING-WAITING (TRANSACTION)
> message that jBoss issues. This may be related to that.
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Joshua M. White [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Sunday, January 28, 2001 4:36 PM
> > To: jBoss
> > Subject: [jBoss-User] Possible Entity Bean Deadlock?
> >
> >
> > I believe the EJB standard says that if a transaction has
> > entity bean A
> > in it, no other transactions may access entity bean A until the first
> > transaction completes. Is this the default behavior on jboss? If not
> > default, is it an option. This leads me to the question - If
> > I have one
> > transaction that grabs entity bean A while another transaction grabs
> > entity bean B, and then the first transaction tries to get
> > entity bean B
> > while the second transaction tries to get entity bean A, will that
> > result in deadlock? Or is the appserver smart enough to not even let
> > this happen in the first place?
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > --------------------------------------------------------------
> > To subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > To unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > List Help?: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
>
> --
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> To subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> To unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> List Help?: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
--------------------------------------------------------------
To subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
List Help?: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
