Re: [sesame-devel] transaction isolation implementation (SES-1901)

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
1 message Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [sesame-devel] transaction isolation implementation (SES-1901)

Peter Ansell-2
The Pull Request is fairly mature now. Adding support for
user-selectable transaction isolation is a significant addition to the
API, and the pull request has gone through a number of changes,
including adding extensible isolation levels and selecting compatible
isolation levels as James Leigh suggested.

All third-party Sail or Repository implementors or users who have not
yet had a chance to review the changes are welcome to comment on the
Pull Request at BitBucket [1]. This is especially vital if you wish to
have more time to review it before it is merged it into the codebase
for the upcoming 2.8 release. Although the isolation levels are
extensible, it is easiest if the base list of isolation levels
contains the vast majority of commonly used and available strategies
[2].

Cheers,

Peter

[1] https://bitbucket.org/openrdf/sesame/pull-request/196/ses-1901-api-support-for-transaction
[2] https://bitbucket.org/openrdf/sesame/pull-request/196/ses-1901-api-support-for-transaction/diff#Lcore/model/src/main/java/org/openrdf/IsolationLevels.javaT32

On 17 October 2013 09:51, Jeen Broekstra <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Folks,
>
> I've just done an update of the pull request for SES-1901 based on the
> feedback received. I'd like to invite you all to have another good look at
> what's there now.
>
> Specifically, I've added support for selecting "upwards compatible"
> isolation levels as suggested by James, and have added a list of
> (store-specific) supported isolation levels: by default set to include
> read-committed and repeatable read, but of course each SAIL implementation
> can override this as required.
>
> One other suggestion James made is to make the set of isolation levels
> extensible. I have not yet implemented this because I am not quite sure the
> advantages outweigh the added complexity (I am worried the mechanism will
> become too complex and will simply be ignored by users and third-party store
> implementors alike). I'd like to hear your thoughts.
>
>
> Jeen
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Sesame developers" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to [hidden email].
> To post to this group, send email to [hidden email].
> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sesame-devel.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Android is increasing in popularity, but the open development platform that
developers love is also attractive to malware creators. Download this white
paper to learn more about secure code signing practices that can help keep
Android apps secure.
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=65839951&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
Sesame-general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/sesame-general