In the situation where 2 transactions set a unidirectional relationship on the
same object, the second transaction will lock-up until it timeout. maybe this
is the normal CMP behaviour, but it seems like this operation should be
possible.
The case I'm working on has 2 Tx happen that execute on
So, this would mean that this quote from your documentation is not correct?
ÂWhen a bean is marked as read-only, it never takes part in a transaction. This means
it is never transactionally lockedÂ
View the original post :
http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=3850411#3850411
A CMR getter does not lock its value. The instances are locked when you iterate
through the CMR collection and invoke methods on instances. This intended behaviour
for the standard container configuration.
Mark CMP getters as read-only.
View the original post :
http://www.jboss.org/index.html?m
Woops I pressed Submit too fast...
I would also like to know how easy or dificult this is to change. This feature cause
lots of deadlock in my application because the related beans get locked everytime a
call to getValueObject is processed. (My value objects contain related beans)
I realize that
Anybody home?
Locking blind-side of unidirectional relationships when calling getter method and
ignoring read-only tags for relationship methods.
I would like to get a brief summary of why this is the way it is?
View the original post :
http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=38
Seems like you are right. Theoretically locking the 'blind' side is not required in
this case unless the blind side has a foreign key which is modified.
In fact, uni- and bidirectional relationships are managed in the same way. And the
blind side still holds the state of the relationship as part
Hello Alexey,
thank you for your answer.
I understand the lock of the other side (user) if this relation would be
bidirectional. But its unidirectional, so from user there is no connection to document.
So is the lock really needed, even for unidirectional relations?
Silvio
View the original p
When you modify one side of the relationship, we have to modify the other one. For
that we need a lock. Since you are using pessimistic locking, the lock is pessimistic.
In read-only case, locking still happends but only for the duration of the method
invocation, not the tx.
View the original po
