> I will give it a try. Can you explicitly confirm that it > shouldn't be a multithreading problem where there are > serveral entitymanagers > created in different JTA transactions running in parallel? e.g.
Assuming that the different JTA transactions are on different threads, and that you do not try to access one EM from multiple threads, there should be no problem. (If you want to access a single EM from multiple threads, you should set the openjpa.Multithreaded property accordingly.) Also, it would be useful to see a JDBC trace-level log of the system running through a couple of transactions. That might give us an idea of how things are working. Are you ever sharing EMs across multiple sequential JTA transactions? -Patrick -- Patrick Linskey BEA Systems, Inc. _______________________________________________________________________ Notice: This email message, together with any attachments, may contain information of BEA Systems, Inc., its subsidiaries and affiliated entities, that may be confidential, proprietary, copyrighted and/or legally privileged, and is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity named in this message. If you are not the intended recipient, and have received this message in error, please immediately return this by email and then delete it. > -----Original Message----- > From: Hans J. Prueller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2007 1:08 PM > To: open-jpa-dev@incubator.apache.org > Subject: RE: WARNING: Connection not closed by caller - > messagesproducedbyOpenJPA? > > Am Mittwoch, den 28.03.2007, 12:43 -0700 schrieb Patrick Linskey: > > > What happens if you set 'openjpa.TransactionMode' to > 'managed' as well? > > > > I will give it a try. Can you explicitly confirm that it > shouldn't be a multithreading problem where there are > serveral entitymanagers > created in different JTA transactions running in parallel? e.g. > > TX A starts > EM A created > A working > TX B starts > EM B created > A and B working > (this is where we currently get the errors) > ... > > > > Also, are you closing your EMs at the end of the transaction? > > > > not really. the problem is that we have serveral methods > calling each other - each of it creating its own EM at the > beginning. (which > will be the same EM instance regarding to the lookup code we > implementend - see previous mail). So close() of a sub-method would > call the "outer" methods EM too I guess? > > Hans > Notice: This email message, together with any attachments, may contain information of BEA Systems, Inc., its subsidiaries and affiliated entities, that may be confidential, proprietary, copyrighted and/or legally privileged, and is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity named in this message. If you are not the intended recipient, and have received this message in error, please immediately return this by email and then delete it.
