On Apr 1, 2008, at 4:47 PM, Taylor Gautier wrote:
So right, if I understand you, we have Object foo. VM A. and VM B.
In VM A local transients are attached to foo. And likewise in VM
B. If/when Object foo leaves/comes back to VM A, its local
transients are restored (so foo gets the transients for foo from the
transient pool in VM A). And likewise in VM B, but when foo is on
VM B it gets the local transients from the local transient pool in
VM B. The thing to note is that the local pool in VM B is just that
- local to VM B and likewise for VM A.
The only problem I see with this is garbage - when / how do local
transients get cleaned up? A soft reference might not be enough,
since an application might expect that the object and its transients
stick around. But if the object gets flushed, and the transients
ultimately get flushed (if they are soft references, they might
ultimately be a candidate for garbage) then when the object comes
back, those transients are once again unexpectedly null. Of course
hard references have the opposite problem - they never go away.
The server will notify the client when the object holding the
transient has been DGC'd
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tim Eck" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [email protected]
Sent: Tuesday, April 1, 2008 2:07:49 PM (GMT-0800) America/Los_Angeles
Subject: Re: [tc-dev] I was thinking
This is probably just a clarification, but I think this new behaviour
wouldn't just apply on the VM where objects were first created. Any
place
a shared object migrates, its [local] transients will survive
between a
flush/fault cycle.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:tc-dev-
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Orion Letizi
> Sent: Tuesday, April 01, 2008 1:30 PM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [tc-dev] I was thinking
>
> Sounds good to me. It'll be a lot less surprising for people who
> don't expect their objects to disappear from the JVM they created
it on.
>
> --Orion
>
> On Apr 1, 2008, at 1:23 PM, Steven Harris wrote:
> > about transients. One thing we can do to simplify things a bit
is to
> > have a concept of a locally cached transient. What does this mean?
> > This means that when a something is marked as a "Terracotta
Transient"
> > they can specify whether they want the transient to be saved
> > to a cache on object flush and reinserted on object fault.
> >
> > We can extend the concept to make the "Transient Cache" to hold
onto
> > that object until it is DGC'd in the server.
> > Any thoughts?
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
_______________________________________________
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
_______________________________________________
tc-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.terracotta.org/mailman/listinfo/tc-dev
