On Fri, 20 Aug 2004 16:30:27 -0400, Jason Mihalick
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Gerhard,
Which object cache are you using? ObjectCacheDefaultImpl or
ObjectCachePerBrokerImpl? As the doc states, the ObjectCacheDefaultImpl
does have some drawbacks pertaining to dirty reads. We use OJB in
servlet
On Sat, 21 Aug 2004 15:53:30 +0200, Armin Waibel [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Hi Armin,
Hi again,
I think this one happend during lazy loading of a list proxy. So would
this mean that
- we should not use reference and collection proxies when working with
the ODMG API (this would be a
Gerhard,
Which object cache are you using? ObjectCacheDefaultImpl or
ObjectCachePerBrokerImpl? As the doc states, the ObjectCacheDefaultImpl
does have some drawbacks pertaining to dirty reads. We use OJB in
servlet environment with an extremely query intensive application, but
it's a very
Hi Armin,
some comments below, more in my response to your second post.
On Fri, 20 Aug 2004 19:47:25 +0200, Armin Waibel [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Hi Gerhard,
this sounds alarming :-(
Gerhard Grosse wrote:
So my main questions are:
- Have substantial things changed between RC5 and 1.0
Hi Gerhard,
org.apache.ojb.broker.accesslayer.ListProxy.get(ListProxy.java(Compiled
Code))
at
de.lexcom.pl24.user.model.AccountImpl.hasUserType(AccountImpl.java(Compiled
Code))
...
Seems this exception was caused by a lazy loading object (between rc5
and 1.0 the CollectionProxy stuff was
Hi again,
I think this one happend during lazy loading of a list proxy. So would
this mean that
- we should not use reference and collection proxies when working with
the ODMG API (this would be a heavy blow)
In a normal servlet environment this should be work. Only when using OJB
within EJB
Hi,
We have developed a servlet application using a slightly modified
version of OJB 1.0RC5 using the ODMG API. The application has been
tested with Unit Tests, comprehensive manual funcional tests, and
(mainly single-threaded) performance tests and everything seemed to
work well.
As last step
Hi Gerhard,
this sounds alarming :-(
Gerhard Grosse wrote:
So my main questions are:
- Have substantial things changed between RC5 and 1.0 that might have
improved OJB's behavior under high concurrent load.
we made serveral improvements between rc5 and 1.0. The performance
improvement of the
I run some massive multithreaded tests against the 1.0_RELEASE branch in
CVS (against hsql in-memory mode, single CPU) without failures (with
tweaked OJB settings). In this test each thread work on separate
objects, maybe the problems occur only when different threads work on
the same objects.
