Seems reasonable to me. Anyone know if there is a reason why it isn't
already that way? 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:tc-dev-
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Gary Keim
> Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2007 5:59 PM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: [tc-dev] auto-synchronized autlocks
> 
> Currently only read and write autolocks can be auto-synchronized.  Does
it
> not makes sense to allow concurrent and synchronous-write autolocks to
> also
> be auto-synchronized?
> 
> In addition to:
> 
> ConfigLockLevel.AUTO_SYNCHRONIZED_READ
> ConfigLockLevel.AUTO_SYNCHRONIZED_WRITE
> 
> Shouldn't there also be:
> 
> ConfigLockLevel.AUTO_SYNCHRONIZED_SYNCHRONOUS_WRITE
> ConfigLockLevel.AUTO_SYNCHRONIZED_CONCURRENT
> 
> Rational: the concept of automatically introducing a monitor is
orthogonal
> to the type of lock on that monitor.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> tc-dev mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.terracotta.org/mailman/listinfo/tc-dev

_______________________________________________
tc-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.terracotta.org/mailman/listinfo/tc-dev

Reply via email to