Jeff Boring wrote: > Note also that locking a described above is totally independent > of the RDBMS locking. This is something I am currently struggling > with because my app's RDBMS is used by lots of other applications > and the ODMG object locking only works if every app using the RDBMS > is using ODMG. <snip> > I just don't have a good feel for the issues with using ODMG in a > mixed environment where all the other apps are using standard optimistic > locking.
Jeff, I'm struggling with the same exact issues. Since all the other apps are using standard optimistic, I have no use for ODMG's locking. I mean, it sounds great and all, but we can't change our locking strategy. So, can I use ODMG without the locking mechanism? I have tried replacing the lock manager with a no-op implementation, no problems so far. Another issue is the object cache. Since we're using optimistic locking to catch concurrency errors, I want each thread in my servlet container to be independent. I want to allow two concurrent threads to work on the same object, and just let the optimistic lock check catch concurrency problems. That's how all our other apps that hit this db currently work. Plus, I don't want changes to an object by a request in one thread to be seen by a request in another thread. Can I make the object cache 'thread local' with ODMG? With PersistenceBroker? Steve Molitor -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
