Well, the merge of two nodes will be part of the transaction, too. At the end of the transaction, all operations inside that transaction - whether or not related to versioning - will either be committed as an entity or rolled back.
Kind regards Dominique On 6/1/07, Frédéric Esnault <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I agree on this, hasPendingChanges returning true in case of saved but uncommitted tx would create some difficulties, especially in a case like the one you submitted. But...wouldn't it be dangerous to allow a merge of two nodes if one of them is potentially modified by an uncommitted transaction? The merge can succeed before tx commit, and fail after commit, which is a situation hasPendingChanges not taking care of tx would allow. Am I wrong? Frédéric Esnault - Ingénieur R&D Legisway 60 boulevard de la mission Marchand 92400 Courbevoie La Défense -----Message d'origine----- De: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] De la part de Dominique Pfister Envoyé: vendredi 1 juin 2007 15:17 À: [email protected] Objet: Re: XASession and hasPendingChanges Hi Frédéric, according to the specification, hasPendingChanges should return true if the session has unsaved changes. Some operations (e.g. javax.jcr.Node.merge(String, boolean)) rely on a session not having any pending changes. Some client could perfectly use code such as node.addNode("child"); node.getSession().save(); node.merge("sourcews", true); If an XASessionImpl has saved but uncommitted changes - this is probably the case you're referring to, isn't it? - it could decide to return true in its hasPendingChanges implementation. However, the same client, unaware of the transactional nature of its session, would never be able to execute the same piece of code shown above, because the session would still report pending changes. In other words, a client would have to detect whether or not it runs in a transactional environment, which is probably not what you want. Kind regards Dominique On 6/1/07, Frédéric Esnault <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I have a question about the transactional version of the SessionImpl object. > > It inherits the hasPendingChanges from the SessionImpl class, but my question is : > > > > Shouldn't the hasPendingChanges from XASessionImpl take into consideration the tx status? > > Or am I missing something? > > > > Frederic Esnault > >
