Eclipse Community Forums
Forum Search:

Search      Help    Register    Login    Home
Home » Modeling » EMF » [CDO 4.0] Durable Lock + CDOBranch + Connection aware URI
[CDO 4.0] Durable Lock + CDOBranch + Connection aware URI [message #873444] Fri, 18 May 2012 04:53 Go to next message
Esteban Dugueperoux is currently offline Esteban Dugueperoux
Messages: 271
Registered: July 2009
Senior Member
Hi,

I study the use of CDO connection aware URI with our application which
uses durable lock and cdoBranch, but currently it seems that we can't
use durable lock with branch, that's right? I say that because I see a
CDOTransactionImpl constructor with a CDOBranch parameter, another with
a durableLockingID String parameter but no with both.

Best Regards.
Re: [CDO 4.0] Durable Lock + CDOBranch + Connection aware URI [message #873454 is a reply to message #873444] Fri, 18 May 2012 05:07 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Alex Lagarde is currently offline Alex Lagarde
Messages: 128
Registered: May 2010
Senior Member

Hi Esteban,

each durable locking ID is specific to a branch, so when you open a
transaction through a durable locking ID the corresponding branch is
automatically detected. See
https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=370979 for further details.

Alex
Le 18/05/2012 10:53, Esteban Dugueperoux a écrit :
> Hi,
>
> I study the use of CDO connection aware URI with our application which
> uses durable lock and cdoBranch, but currently it seems that we can't
> use durable lock with branch, that's right? I say that because I see a
> CDOTransactionImpl constructor with a CDOBranch parameter, another with
> a durableLockingID String parameter but no with both.
>
> Best Regards.
Re: [CDO 4.0] Durable Lock + CDOBranch + Connection aware URI [message #873563 is a reply to message #873454] Fri, 18 May 2012 10:34 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Esteban Dugueperoux is currently offline Esteban Dugueperoux
Messages: 271
Registered: July 2009
Senior Member
Ok I understand better, it's only connection aware URI which doesn't
support durable lock ID in query parameters.

On 18/05/2012 11:07, Alex Lagarde wrote:
> Hi Esteban,
>
> each durable locking ID is specific to a branch, so when you open a
> transaction through a durable locking ID the corresponding branch is
> automatically detected. See
> https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=370979 for further details.
>
> Alex
> Le 18/05/2012 10:53, Esteban Dugueperoux a écrit :
>> Hi,
>>
>> I study the use of CDO connection aware URI with our application which
>> uses durable lock and cdoBranch, but currently it seems that we can't
>> use durable lock with branch, that's right? I say that because I see a
>> CDOTransactionImpl constructor with a CDOBranch parameter, another with
>> a durableLockingID String parameter but no with both.
>>
>> Best Regards.
>
Re: [CDO 4.0] Durable Lock + CDOBranch + Connection aware URI [message #873855 is a reply to message #873563] Sat, 19 May 2012 05:02 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Eike Stepper is currently offline Eike Stepper
Messages: 5177
Registered: July 2009
Senior Member
Am 18.05.2012 16:34, schrieb Esteban Dugueperoux:
> Ok I understand better, it's only connection aware URI which doesn't support durable lock ID in query parameters.
IIRC we didn't adjust the connection-aware URIs when we introduced durable locking. Please submit a request for
enhancement if you want to open durable locking views through connection-aware URIs.

Cheers
/Eike

----
http://www.esc-net.de
http://thegordian.blogspot.com
http://twitter.com/eikestepper


>
> On 18/05/2012 11:07, Alex Lagarde wrote:
>> Hi Esteban,
>>
>> each durable locking ID is specific to a branch, so when you open a
>> transaction through a durable locking ID the corresponding branch is
>> automatically detected. See
>> https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=370979 for further details.
>>
>> Alex
>> Le 18/05/2012 10:53, Esteban Dugueperoux a écrit :
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I study the use of CDO connection aware URI with our application which
>>> uses durable lock and cdoBranch, but currently it seems that we can't
>>> use durable lock with branch, that's right? I say that because I see a
>>> CDOTransactionImpl constructor with a CDOBranch parameter, another with
>>> a durableLockingID String parameter but no with both.
>>>
>>> Best Regards.
>>
>
Re: [CDO 4.0] Durable Lock + CDOBranch + Connection aware URI [message #874577 is a reply to message #873855] Mon, 21 May 2012 03:19 Go to previous message
Esteban Dugueperoux is currently offline Esteban Dugueperoux
Messages: 271
Registered: July 2009
Senior Member
Hi,

I have created https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=380107

Best Regards.

On 19/05/2012 11:02, Eike Stepper wrote:
> Am 18.05.2012 16:34, schrieb Esteban Dugueperoux:
>> Ok I understand better, it's only connection aware URI which doesn't
>> support durable lock ID in query parameters.
> IIRC we didn't adjust the connection-aware URIs when we introduced
> durable locking. Please submit a request for enhancement if you want to
> open durable locking views through connection-aware URIs.
>
> Cheers
> /Eike
>
> ----
> http://www.esc-net.de
> http://thegordian.blogspot.com
> http://twitter.com/eikestepper
>
>
>>
>> On 18/05/2012 11:07, Alex Lagarde wrote:
>>> Hi Esteban,
>>>
>>> each durable locking ID is specific to a branch, so when you open a
>>> transaction through a durable locking ID the corresponding branch is
>>> automatically detected. See
>>> https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=370979 for further
>>> details.
>>>
>>> Alex
>>> Le 18/05/2012 10:53, Esteban Dugueperoux a écrit :
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> I study the use of CDO connection aware URI with our application which
>>>> uses durable lock and cdoBranch, but currently it seems that we can't
>>>> use durable lock with branch, that's right? I say that because I see a
>>>> CDOTransactionImpl constructor with a CDOBranch parameter, another with
>>>> a durableLockingID String parameter but no with both.
>>>>
>>>> Best Regards.
>>>
>>
Previous Topic:URI Fragments and intrinsic ID
Next Topic:[CDO]
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Wed Jun 19 15:56:37 EDT 2013

Powered by FUDForum. Page generated in 0.03635 seconds