Ok, thanks :-)

On 07 Sep 2007, at 08:16, Steven Harris wrote:

> Nope, Concurrent is a free for all and should rarely be used. If it
> is used it should
> be used by people who know what they are doing :-)
>
> On Sep 6, 2007, at 11:12 PM, Geert Bevin wrote:
>
>> Ok, thanks!
>>
>> Curious now, so there is some kind of transaction isolation then? Is
>> this basically the same as the traditional 'serializable' isolation
>> that prevents any kind of dirty reads to the changes that haven't
>> been applied yet? Are those changes also not applied to the local
>> data structures or is this only cluster-related?
>>
>> On 07 Sep 2007, at 08:03, Steven Harris wrote:
>>
>>> The transaction is an atomic set of changes that either will be
>>> applied to the cluster in whole
>>> or not at all.
>>>
>>> On Sep 6, 2007, at 11:01 PM, Geert Bevin wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hmmm, do you mean here that they instate memory barriers to ensure
>>>> that those instructions aren't reordered or missed in a cache on
>>>> another node/thread? I thought Terracotta didn't do anything
>>>> transaction-related (isolation, commit-rollback, ...)?
>>>>
>>>> On 07 Sep 2007, at 07:50, Steven Harris wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> concurrent locks provide transaction boundaries with no  
>>>>> locking. In
>>>>> that sense they are miss-named because
>>>>> they aren't actually locks
>>>>>
>>>>> On Sep 6, 2007, at 10:47 PM, Geert Bevin wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> In general, one thing I've been wondering about: what's the
>>>>>> difference between using concurrent locks and using no locking at
>>>>>> all?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 07 Sep 2007, at 02:58, Gary Keim wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 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.
>>
>> --
>> Geert Bevin
>> Terracotta - http://www.terracotta.org
>> Uwyn "Use what you need" - http://uwyn.com
>> RIFE Java application framework - http://rifers.org
>> Music and words - http://gbevin.com
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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

--
Geert Bevin
Terracotta - http://www.terracotta.org
Uwyn "Use what you need" - http://uwyn.com
RIFE Java application framework - http://rifers.org
Music and words - http://gbevin.com

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

Reply via email to