[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JDO-747?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15257294#comment-15257294
 ] 

Craig L Russell commented on JDO-747:
-------------------------------------

I've updated the "third table" in the specification to reflect the behavior of 
refresh for persistent-nontransactional-dirty instances:

If the object exists, the cached state should be persistent-nontransactional, 
as the changes are overwritten by the state in the datastore.

If the object does not exist, the state should be transient, with no update 
from the datastore.

refresh where the object exists in the datastore
P-nontrans
error
error
refresh where the object does not exist in the datastore
transient
error
error


> Behavior of delete() with multiple concurrent Transactions
> ----------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: JDO-747
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JDO-747
>             Project: JDO
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: specification
>    Affects Versions: JDO 3.1
>            Reporter: Tilmann Zäschke
>            Priority: Minor
>              Labels: concurrency, delete, documentation, refresh(), 
> specification
>             Fix For: JDO 3.2
>
>         Attachments: JDO-StateTransition-logs-2015-12-04.zip, 
> OptimisticCheckConsistency.java, OptimisticFailurePatch_JDO747.txt, 
> StateTransitionPatch_JDO747_v5.txt
>
>
> In the Spec I could not find any statement regarding on how a transaction 
> should behave if an object is deleted in a different concurrent transaction.
> Related Sections are Section 5.8 (how different methods should behave for 
> different object states) and Section 12.6.1 (the behavior of refresh() and 
> related methods).
> For example I wonder about the following situations. Suppose I have two 
> optimistic sessions, pm1 and pm2, both access the same object. pm1 deletes 
> the object and commits. Then what happens in pm2 if:
> 1. pm2 deletes the object and tries to commit, should that work? It's
>    wouldn't be a real conflict if both delete it.
> 2. pm2 modifies the object (make dirty) and calls {{refresh()}}. Should I
>    get an {{ObjectNotFound}} exception?
> 3. pm2 deletes the object and calls {{refresh()}}. According to the spec,
>    {{refresh()}} should not change the object's state. But should it
>    still fail with {{ObjectNotFound}}? If refresh should fail, how can I
>    ever recover from such a situation, because I can't undelete the
>    object?
> Is there a common understanding how this should work? 
> IF there an external definition JDO relies on, then I think a reference to an 
> external document might useful.
> If not, should the Spec define concurrent behavior?



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)

Reply via email to