RE: [Jdbm-developer] re[14]: 2PL: transactions, threads < s ni p>

[Thompson, B. B. <BRY...@sa...>]

I am not sure that you can do this on a per-transaction basis.  If you are
not using the same lock/queue objects, then you are not going to be able to
coordinate across transactions.  I think that this could be an architectural
choice for an application, but not a per-tx choice. -bryan

 

  _____  

From: jdb...@li...
[mailto:jdb...@li...] On Behalf Of Alex
Boisvert
Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2006 12:22 PM
To: 'Kevin Day'
Cc: JDBM Developer listserv
Subject: Re: [Jdbm-developer] re[14]: 2PL: transactions, threads < s nip>

 

'Kevin Day' wrote: 

So....  do we need to implement 2PL at the jdbm level?  Or do we use
optimistic, and tell developers that they have to use locking at the
application level if they want to avoid rollbacks for highly contended
records?

I think this should be a pluggable policy that could be set of a
per-transaction basis.

alex