Some Guy wrote:
All that should be required is to define a version or timestamp
property for the entity in question. Hbn will constrain against that
field when it performs the update. If the db returns 0 updated rows,
then Hbn will throw the stale exception.
That's what I thought and did, but wasn't that simple. I think it's
because our persistence approach isn't too friendly with EJB.
I recall there's a way to pessimistically lock using db locks (select
for update, etc.), but I assume that's only valid for the duration of
your transaction. I never had call to use it.
If you use timestamps, make sure your db columns have millisecond
resolution.
On Nov 12, 2009, at 10:18 PM, Mark Proctor <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Michael Neale wrote:
I am not aware of peasimistic locking use being very common. When
people want it, it's generally cause the GUI suggests it (eg bob wants
to view a file, but Alice has it locked)
With optimistic locking we can just submit our update and it fails if
something else updted the recorded in the mean time - doing a counter
comparison. With pessemistic we have to download the record first,
compare them, and then upload. As what we are comparing in a binary
blob, we want to avoid pulling that from the db.
Mark
Sent from my phone.
On 13/11/2009, at 10:27 AM, Salaboy <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
I suppose that the versión field its being used. So, the default must
be optimistic
- Ing. Mauricio Salatino -
On Nov 12, 2009, at 9:43 PM, Michael Neale <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>>
wrote:
I thought optimistic locking was the default ? Or do you mean you
know
how to switch, just that it doesn't work?
Sent from my phone.
On 13/11/2009, at 8:16 AM, Salaboy <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
I Will take a look on that
Sent from my iPhone
On Nov 12, 2009, at 7:33 PM, Mark Proctor <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>>
wrote:
Any hibernate guru's out there? Currently the persistence stuff
uses
pessematic locking, which is slow, in theory we should be using
optimistic locking, but I couldn't get it to work. Anyone want to
give
that a go?
Mark
_______________________________________________
rules-dev mailing list
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-dev
_______________________________________________
rules-dev mailing list
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-dev
_______________________________________________
rules-dev mailing list
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-dev
_______________________________________________
rules-dev mailing list
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-dev
_______________________________________________
rules-dev mailing list
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-dev
_______________________________________________
rules-dev mailing list
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-dev
------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
rules-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-dev
_______________________________________________
rules-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-dev
