Hi Pedro,

My question is.... is it supposed to "lock" the entire collection when
> storing a resource (inside a transaction)? Am I doing something wrong?


Yes, the entire collection is locked (reading/writing) when it's being
updated.

How can I resolve this situation?
>

Unfortunately, the best solution - commit as soon as possible. You can also
try to split your data into two or more collections. BTW, how many documents
do you have in this collections? Why it's so important not to be locked?

Sedna also supports "read only" transactions which never wait for
other transactions
(they do not have to acquire any document/collection locks). However they might
access slightly obsolete state of the database (for example, they probably
would not see the most recent committed updates). This is a very good option
for highly concurent applications. Unfortunately, this option is not
available in XML:DB API as far as I know. It's available only in C API at
present.


> Another thing I'm interested.... I've tried using the metacommands in
> se_term but the execution always fails giving me a syntax error ...
>

What version do you use? I can't reproduce this issue. That's what I got
(Sedna 3.2.91 on Windows):

$ ./se_term -file 2.xq x

UPDATE is executed successfully
UPDATE is executed successfully
<?xml version="1.0" standalone="yes"?><test>test</test>

Where 2.xq exactly contains the following:

\nac
CREATE DOCUMENT "test"&
UPDATE INSERT <test>{"test"}</test> INTO fn:doc("test")&
fn:doc("test")&
\commit


Ivan Shcheklein,
Sedna Team
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Let Crystal Reports handle the reporting - Free Crystal Reports 2008 30-Day 
trial. Simplify your report design, integration and deployment - and focus on 
what you do best, core application coding. Discover what's new with
Crystal Reports now.  http://p.sf.net/sfu/bobj-july
_______________________________________________
Sedna-discussion mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/sedna-discussion

Reply via email to