Hi All,
I've noticed that as of iBatis 2.5.x there were no optimistic locking
support (as per Google search :)) in iBatis.
Has anything changed since then?
Thanks.
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> Yes, all these posts do answer my question. And, agree with Clinton Begin
> as
> he said - "there is no magic there..."
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://www.nabble.com/IBATIS-2.3.3%2C-JDK-1.5---Optimistic-locking
Yes, all these posts do answer my question. And, agree with Clinton Begin as
he said - "there is no magic there..."
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/IBATIS-2.3.3%2C-JDK-1.5---Optimistic-locking-strategies-tp19867989p19924928.html
Sent from the iBATIS - User - Ja
Your fundamental question is obviously unclear. Thus repeating your
> fundamental question is not helpful. Clearly our fundamental answers are
> inadequate or are being fundamentally misunderstood. Fundamentally, this is
> simple for everyone else who has ever achieved optimistic locking
Your fundamental question is obviously unclear. Thus repeating your
fundamental question is not helpful. Clearly our fundamental answers are
inadequate or are being fundamentally misunderstood. Fundamentally, this is
simple for everyone else who has ever achieved optimistic locking with
iBATIS
7:07 AM, mule_user <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> My fundamental question was:
>
> Is there a way to achieve optimistic locking, if the "OldObject" and/or the
> update timestamp of the old object were NOT available in scope.
>
> It seems that the solution in iB
My fundamental question was:
Is there a way to achieve optimistic locking, if the "OldObject" and/or the
update timestamp of the old object were NOT available in scope.
It seems that the solution in iBATIS requires you to keep the "OldObject" in
scope because, the where cl
nnot update the database record
> without the old id...
>
> Clinton
>
> On Thu, Oct 9, 2008 at 7:57 AM, mule_user <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>
>> My fundamental question was:
>>
>> Is there a way to achieve optimistic locking using timestamp att
>
> Is there a way to achieve optimistic locking using timestamp attribute, if
> the "OldObject" and/or the update timestamp of the old object is available
> in scope.
>
> All the solutions require you to keep the "OldObject" in scope because, the
> where cl
My fundamental question was:
Is there a way to achieve optimistic locking using timestamp attribute, if
the "OldObject" and/or the update timestamp of the old object is available
in scope.
All the solutions require you to keep the "OldObject" in scope because, the
where cla
:54 AM
Please respond to
user-java@ibatis.apache.org
To
user-java@ibatis.apache.org
cc
Subject
Re: IBATIS 2.3.3, JDK 1.5 - Optimistic locking strategies
I am still looking for answers to my 5 questions.
Option1: Caching solution may not solve optimistic locking issue:
iBATIS cache model th
I am still looking for answers to my 5 questions.
Option1: Caching solution may not solve optimistic locking issue:
iBATIS cache model that can be used to cache LRU objects etc. But it still
does not solve the issue of optimistic locking. Consider a scenario like
below:
Mr. X and Mr. Y have a
you'd normally specify LRU, OSCACHE etc., just use the fully
qualified class name or alias the name (e.g. EHCACHE).
Clinton
On Tue, Oct 7, 2008 at 3:44 PM, mule_user <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I would like to explore the strategies for achieving optimistic locking
> using
&
I would like to explore the strategies for achieving optimistic locking using
iBATIS 2.3.3 and JDK 1.5.
Following are the constraints:
1. Need to use timestamp column in the database. Cannot use version column
in the database, as the current data model does not support version.
2. It will be
n, CA 94568
(925) 236-5553
"MCCORMICK, Paul"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
03/15/2006 05:30 PM
Please respond to
user-java@ibatis.apache.org
To
<
user-java@ibatis.apache.org>
cc
Subject
RE: Optimistic locking question
Instead of using a timestamp I
use an integer a
Sybase has timestamp just for that.
.V
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I would agree that this would be an easy implementation that I would
prefer. The problem is that I am working with an existing Data Model
that I inherited and I cannot change without having an enormous impact
on multiple groups
30 PM
Please respond to
user-java@ibatis.apache.org
To
cc
Subject
RE: Optimistic locking question
Instead of using a timestamp I
use an integer and increment the value on every update.
update customer
set NAME= #name#,
VERSION_ID
= VERSION_ID + 1
where ID = #ID# and VERSION_ID
= #V
ord: " + record);
}
record.setVersionId(record.getVersionId() + 1
);
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, 15 March
2006 11:55 PMTo: user-java@ibatis.apache.orgSubject:
Optimistic locking question
I have a table: CREATE TABLE CUSTOMER ID NUMBER NOT NULL,
I have a table:
CREATE TABLE CUSTOMER
ID
NUMBER NOT NULL,
NAME
VARCHAR(32) NOT NULL,
RECORD_DATE
TIMESTAMP NOT NULL,
...
The Record_Date is used to determine
the last time the record was updated, so when I perform an update my SQL
would look something like:
up
19 matches
Mail list logo
