[jbosscache-dev] Re: Helping out with JBCACHE-991 (Non-tx batching)

[Manik Surtani]

On 31 Jul 2007, at 01:46, Vincent Marquez wrote:

> Well, would using the BMTM hold write-locks until a commit?   One  
> of the reasons I liked your proposal for having batch functionality  
> seperate from Tx's was the idea that you could use pessimistic  
> locking during a tx, and still have a way to batch calls without  
> locks.  This may not be a common use case though.

I'd have thought batching would hold locks as well.

Unless you see batching as just queueing calls and applying them when  
batchComplete() (or whatever we call it) is invoked.  But then how do  
you deal with failures?  Is the batch atomic?

>
>  I realize this won't be an issue once the new  MVCC locking  
> changes are completed, but that seemed to be quite a ways out.

Not really; depends on how you logically see the function of  
batching.  It may still make sense in MVCC as well.

And hopefully it won't be that long a way out - I'm hoping by pretty  
early next year.  I presume you've seen the designs up on the wiki?

--
Manik Surtani

Lead, JBoss Cache
JBoss, a division of Red Hat