I don't understand what is different between the two. Are you saying to have only one place where we wait? If so I agree. Bill Burke wrote: > It's not this same. Basically you have a loop to check to see if the > transaction has been commited or unlocked, but you put a wait of 5 seconds > in there. After the 5 seconds if you're still not locked loop again. > > OT, how does transaction timeout destroy the thread? TIA. > > > Bill > > >>-----Original Message----- >>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of danch >>(Dan Christopherson) >>Sent: Wednesday, June 06, 2001 3:35 PM >>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>Subject: Re: Missing wait/notify (was Re: [JBoss-dev] Avoiding Locks for >>READ-ONLY Beans) >> >> >>I think that's roughly equivalent to Georg's 'wait(DEADLOCKTIMEOUT + >>1000)'. Did Marc talk about waiting on 'this'? or is that non-literal? >> >>Bill Burke wrote: >> >> >>>I remember Marc talking about this issue awhile back. He said the best >>>performance would be to have the wait within a loop with a 5 >>> >>second wait. >> >>>while (!locked()) // pseudo code >>>{ >>> this.wait(5000); >>> if (!locked()) >>> { >>> log.("LOCKING-WAITING...."); >>> } >>>} >>> >>> >>>Regards, >>>Bill >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>>-----Original Message----- >>>>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>>>[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of danch >>>>(Dan Christopherson) >>>>Sent: Wednesday, June 06, 2001 1:31 PM >>>>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>>>Subject: Re: Missing wait/notify (was Re: [JBoss-dev] Avoiding Locks for >>>>READ-ONLY Beans) >>>> >>>> >>>>danch (Dan Christopherson) wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>>Georg Rehfeld wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>One problem here is that when we're waiting on the context, we want to >>>>>wait on the context (i.e. "ctx.wait(DEADLOCKTIMEOUT + 1000)") >>>>> >>>>> >>>>Just doing >>>> >>>> >>>>>wait and notifyAll on the interceptor itself will involve all calls on >>>>>our entity when we just want to handle contention for the one context. >>>>> >>>>>The other problem is that if we're waiting on the transaction, we don't >>>>>want to do wait/notify on the context - I don't know what we do want to >>>>>wait on, but we really need to know when the transaction ends. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>Actually, looking closer at the code, it's probably the mutex that we >>>>want to wait on in both cases - it is specific to the key involved. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>>_______________________________________________ >>>Jboss-development mailing list >>>[EMAIL PROTECTED] >>>http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development >>> >>> >> >> > > > > _______________________________________________ > Jboss-development mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development >
Confidential e-mail for addressee only. Access to this e-mail by anyone else is unauthorized. If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately by reply e-mail and destroy the original communication.
