Thanks! I had just noticed it seemed to be different from earlier releases
(unless I missed something) with transaction state and closing.
-Jacob
| -Original Message-
| From: Lance Eason [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
| Sent: Friday, March 28, 2003 12:25 PM
| To: OJB Users List
| Subject: RE: PersistenceBroker State Question
|
| It all depends on the cache you use (specified in OJB.properties).
| ObjectCacheDefaultImpl will never get flushed automatically (which can be
| problematic for transactional isolation). ObjectCachePerBrokerImpl will
| get flushed on broker.close().
|
| -Original Message-
| From: Jacob Hookom [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
| Sent: Friday, March 28, 2003 11:29 AM
| To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
| Subject: PersistenceBroker State Question
|
|
| Pertaining to caching and speed of the PersistenceBroker, am I on the
| right
| track for structuring calls like so:
|
| // Method OjbUserDao.insertUser()
| public void insertUser(User user) throws Exception
| {
| // calls PersistenceBrokerFactory.defaultPersistenceBroker()
| PersistenceBroker broker =
| OjbDaoFactory.getInstance().createBroker();
| try
| {
| broker.beginTransaction();
| broker.store(user, ObjectModificationDefaultImpl.INSERT);
| broker.commitTransaction();
| }
| finally
| {
| broker.close();
| }
| }
|
| Does the cache in general get flushed when I call broker.close()? I'm just
| using the Broker in Single-VM mode.
|
| Regards,
| Jacob Hookom
| Student, University of Wisconsin
|
|
|
| -
| To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
| For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
|
|
| -
| To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
| For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
