Hi, We have implemented something similar. In our case multiple applications should be able to request locks, so we have implemented it on the database. It's based on DBMS_LOCK (Oracle specific). When an application crashes (or is killed in an unclean manner) Oracle will roll back any pending transactions, and automagically release the locks. Works very well (btw, our applications never crash :-)
Since you have only one application, I guess you could do it in the application layer (keep locks in memory). Maarten On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 3:07 AM, James Carman <jcar...@carmanconsulting.com>wrote: > If it's fairly unlikely that two people would be editing the same record at > the same time, then it's probably okay to go with optimistic locking. > > On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 8:41 PM, satar <starl...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > Yep, that is what I thought from the reading I have done. I think I will > do > > it the way I have in the past but using an application-level edit table > > instead of having to use a database. This feels more natural to me and I > > have spent an absorbent amount of time learning Hibernate already and > just > > hoping that I get some return from all of the complexities it has > > eventually. I do believe that will be the case because all you smart > peeps > > wouldn't be using it if there was nothing to gain. The dirty read problem > > seems like such a normal condition for any application that has multiple > > writers, so I thought I would see what is a typical approach within web > > apps > > -- something I am very new at. > > -- > > View this message in context: > > http://www.nabble.com/Dirty-read-edit-problem.-tp24157057p24158076.html > > Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org > > For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org > > > > >
