The problem here is because the node does not exist so the transaction has nothing to lock against from (lock is aossicated with a node).
Bela and I have discussed previously whether *get* a non-existing node should create it implicitly. We have decided against it since it can create an un-expected behavior for exsiting users. But maybe we will re-visit it. Is it possible that you can create the node a priori? That way, the locking should do what you want. On a side note, I have found out that different data stores implement the transaction isolation level (slightly) differently (even among the RDBMS vendors). This is because the data structure (e.g., node vs. table vs. row) and the locking mechanism (optimistic vs. pessimistic). -Ben View the original post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=3854904#3854904 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=3854904 ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: Sybase ASE Linux Express Edition - download now for FREE LinuxWorld Reader's Choice Award Winner for best database on Linux. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=5588&alloc_id=12065&op=click _______________________________________________ JBoss-Development mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
