hi Jorge, Yes, I am using the read-write concurrency strategy. It turns out that the code from that stackoverflow link didnt work too well wrt locking/ unlocking. It basically wasnt working properly and the exceptions were being swallowed without any form of logging.
As it turns out, NH is only calling lock once on the ICache implementation for each unlock. I did some reading on the velocity today and have updated the NH.Velocity cache to work a little better; patch contributed as NHCH-31 (http://216.121.112.228/browse/NHCH-31). cheers Fatal On Nov 27, 3:39 am, Aaron Boxer <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Fatal, > > I take it you are using read-write concurrency strategy. > > I've delved into the caching code a little, and from what I can > gather, multiple Lock > calls simply increment the lock count on the same soft lock object. The lock > handle should not be changing. > > I'm curious to know how you work this one out, as I am developing a new > cache strategy class for read committed and repeatable read isolation. > > Cheers, > Jorge > > On Fri, Nov 26, 2010 at 2:37 AM, Fatal <[email protected]> wrote: > > hi all, > > > I've begun using the NHibernate.Caches.Velocity implementation today. > > I'm updating the code to be compatible with the newer version (aka > > AppFabric Caching Services). To do so, I used the VelocityClient code > > from this stackoverflow question as a > > basis:http://stackoverflow.com/questions/3233792 > > > I seem to be having some trouble with errors coming out of the locking > > implementation and I just wanted to clarify the behaviour of > > nhibernate caching as it relates to locking. > > > What i'm seeing is that NHibernate is calling Lock() several times for > > the same key before it calls Unlock(). With the implementation of the > > code from the link above, this causes exceptions because its trying to > > add a different lock handle with same key to a dictionary (i.e. > > because it is already locked) > > > None of the the NHContrib caches apart from this one seem to implement > > locking yet so i'm curious as to whether its a bug with NHibernate or > > if its intended behaviour and it is expected that locking > > implementations ignore the case where the item is already locked. > > > Is anybody able to provide any clarity around this locking > > functionality? > > > thanks, > > Fatal > > > -- > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > > "NHibernate Contrib - Development Group" group. > > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > > [email protected]. > > For more options, visit this group > > athttp://groups.google.com/group/nhcdevs?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "NHibernate Contrib - Development Group" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/nhcdevs?hl=en.
