From: Mike S. <ms...@md...> - 2009-04-22 17:12:44
|
i seem to recall this was actually just broken before, though? that the code presumed autolocking but didn't enforce it ... so i think this is just a check that's saving you from heartache rather than a new restriction that was introduced. I don't remember why it doesn't do normal locking inside -- i seem to recall there was something annoying about it. chuck -- do you remember? On Apr 22, 2009, at 10:56 AM, Anjo Krank wrote: > > Am 27.02.2009 um 18:25 schrieb chi...@us...: > >> + if ( ! ERXEC.defaultAutomaticLockUnlock()) { >> + throw new RuntimeException("ERXEnterpriseObjectCache requires >> automatic locking, set >> er.extensions.ERXEC.defaultAutomaticLockUnlock or " + >> + "er.extensions.ERXEC.safeLocking in your Properties file"); >> + } > > > This one is not nice. Now I gotta turn this on for all my projects and > need to re-test everything. > > Cheers, Anjo > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Stay on top of everything new and different, both inside and > around Java (TM) technology - register by April 22, and save > $200 on the JavaOne (SM) conference, June 2-5, 2009, San Francisco. > 300 plus technical and hands-on sessions. Register today. > Use priority code J9JMT32. http://p.sf.net/sfu/p > _______________________________________________ > Wonder-cvs mailing list > Won...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wonder-cvs |