[jbosscache-dev] READ_COMMITTED should be enforced for Hibernate 2nd level caching?

[Jason T. Greene]

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