Hi,
I have had similar problems recently. I have now a test case:
public static void main(String[] args) throws Exception {
Repository repository = new TransientRepository();
Session s1 = repository.login(new SimpleCredentials("", new char[0]));
Session s2 = repository.login(new SimpleCredentials("", new char[0]));
s1.getRootNode().setProperty("b", "0"); // init with zero
s1.getRootNode().setProperty("b", (String) null); // delete
s1.save();
s1.getRootNode().setProperty("b", "1");
s2.getRootNode().setProperty("b", "2");
s1.save();
s2.save();
System.out.println("Success");
s1.logout();
s2.logout();
System.out.println("End");
}
As is, the code prints "Success" "End" for me.
If the line marked "... // delete" is commented out, it fails with the
exception
javax.jcr.InvalidItemStateException:
cafebabe-cafe-babe-cafe-babecafebabe/{}b: the item cannot be saved
because it has been modified externally.
at
org.apache.jackrabbit.core.ItemImpl.getTransientStates(ItemImpl.java:246)
at org.apache.jackrabbit.core.ItemImpl.save(ItemImpl.java:928)
at org.apache.jackrabbit.core.SessionImpl.save(SessionImpl.java:849)
at Test.main(Test.java:33)
Exception in thread "main"
It's a bit strange that it works in one case but not the other.
The second problem is that the application doesn't exit (some threads
are still running). Is this the expected behavior? If not I will log a
bug about that.
Regards,
Thomas
On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 2:11 PM, Jukka Zitting <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
> On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 3:06 PM, Julian Reschke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > So, to make this useful, a client would need to re-read the property value
> > before, checking it's still the same as earlier on? Is that the proposal?
>
> Re-reading won't help as another session could still make changes
> before the save.
>
> My suggestion is that the client should use an explicit lock if it
> needs such synchronization.
>
> BR,
>
> Jukka Zitting
>
