Re: [jbosscache-dev] READ_COMMITTED should be enforced for Hibernate 2nd level caching?
Manik Surtani wrote:
On 17 Mar 2009, at 20:33, Jason T. Greene wrote:
> Brian Stansberry wrote:
>
>>> However, this sounds like a problem with PFER. If someone calls
>>> PFER, I think the original transaction should resync the node snapshot.
>> How would this be done? AFAIK the application has no control over the
>> data in JBCs transaction context.
>
> The PFER implementation, not the application, would just drop the node
> from the tx context which invoked pfer. That would mean that any
> subsequent read would fetch the most current data.
No, that is not correct. PFER suspends ongoing TXs and runs outside of
any TX, to prevent a failure rolling back the TX. And this is the root
of the problem.
"correctness" I think is in the eye of the beholder :)
To me it does not seem correct that i can do
pfer(k, 7)
get(k) == null
So to put it another way, the whole point of isolation is to make the
data source appear consistent to the application. How is the above
consistent?
--
Jason T. Greene
JBoss, a division of Red Hat