Re: [infinispan-dev] Implicit locking

Had a bit more discussion on this topic with Mircea and I wanted to get your possible input. I can foresee two ways we can implement this feature. First, in CacheDelegate for each write command we simply invoke lock in case operation is done within transactional context and eager locking is on. Second, Mircea suggested to augment TxInterceptor (probably within shouldEnlist branch of enlistWriteAndInvokeNext method) where we create LockControlCommand and send it down the stack prior to sending intercepted write command down the stack.

Another requirement is not to repeatedly send LCC command around the cluster for write operation that already caused locks to be obtained eagerly around the cluster. I think this requirement can be handled within LockInterceptor#visitLockControlCommand thus hiding the complexity away from possible invocation of LockControlCommand from either CacheDelegate or TxInterceptor.

WDYT? Cheers, Vladimir On 5/25/09 9:02 AM, Vladimir Blagojevic wrote: > Hey, > > I want to start working on [1]. Which operations do we want to > include into transparent implicit eager locking? All operations > that are WriteCommand(s)? > > I want to add boolean attribute useEagerLocking in transaction > configuration element. If you object to this name, speak up!