On 21 March 2016 at 13:30, Pedro Ruivo wrote:
>
>
> On 03/21/2016 12:53 PM, Sanne Grinovero wrote:
>>
>> I'd rather question why this wasn't done than question which use cases
>> are appropriate, as I don't see what benefit it brings to consider
>> each cache a different
On 03/21/2016 12:53 PM, Sanne Grinovero wrote:
>
> I'd rather question why this wasn't done than question which use cases
> are appropriate, as I don't see what benefit it brings to consider
> each cache a different resource? Am I missing a trade-off or is it
> fair to say that there are no
On 21 March 2016 at 12:18, Pedro Ruivo wrote:
>
>
> On 03/21/2016 11:19 AM, Sanne Grinovero wrote:
>> On 21 March 2016 at 10:07, Pedro Ruivo wrote:
>>> Hi Sanne
>>>
>>> On 03/15/2016 07:22 PM, Sanne Grinovero wrote:
Hi all,
I just
On 03/21/2016 01:18 PM, Pedro Ruivo wrote:
>
> On 03/21/2016 11:19 AM, Sanne Grinovero wrote:
>> On 21 March 2016 at 10:07, Pedro Ruivo wrote:
>>> Hi Sanne
>>>
>>> On 03/15/2016 07:22 PM, Sanne Grinovero wrote:
Hi all,
I just noticed that when I'm making
On 03/21/2016 11:19 AM, Sanne Grinovero wrote:
> On 21 March 2016 at 10:07, Pedro Ruivo wrote:
>> Hi Sanne
>>
>> On 03/15/2016 07:22 PM, Sanne Grinovero wrote:
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> I just noticed that when I'm making changes to multiple caches within
>>> the same
Hi Sanne
On 03/15/2016 07:22 PM, Sanne Grinovero wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I just noticed that when I'm making changes to multiple caches within
> the same transaction, the transaction manager will treat this as XA
> transactions.
>
> That seems suboptimal as they are all managed by the same resource;
Hi all,
I just noticed that when I'm making changes to multiple caches within
the same transaction, the transaction manager will treat this as XA
transactions.
That seems suboptimal as they are all managed by the same resource; is
there a configuration I'm missing or should I open a JIRA to ask