Re: Selective commit

From: Andrus Adamchik (andru..bjectstyle.org)
Date: Tue Jan 08 2008 - 09:08:43 EST

  • Next message: Álvaro Martínez: "Re: Selective commit"

    Could you confirm the exact version of Cayenne you are using?

    Thanks,
    Andrus

    On Jan 8, 2008, at 4:05 PM, Álvaro Martínez wrote:

    >
    > Hi, I'm running some issues on this one.
    >
    > I now create a new child data context on every situation. But I'm
    > always getting the same deadlock. I can't figure out how to fix this
    > from my own code.
    >
    > I've googled other people who also had a similar problem, but didn't
    > help.
    >
    > This is the explanation from jConsole:
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > Name: Timer-0
    > State: BLOCKED on org.apache.cayenne.event.DispatchQueu..25268
    > owned by: Timer-4
    > Total blocked: 3 Total waited: 68
    >
    > Stack trace:
    > org
    > .apache.cayenne.event.DispatchQueue.dispatchEvent(DispatchQueue.java:
    > 54)
    > org
    > .apache.cayenne.event.EventManager.dispatchEvent(EventManager.java:
    > 336)
    > org.apache.cayenne.event.EventManager.postEvent(EventManager.java:307)
    > org
    > .apache
    > .cayenne.access.DataContext.fireDataChannelChanged(DataContext.java:
    > 1704)
    > org
    > .apache
    > .cayenne
    > .access
    > .DataContextMergeHandler.graphFlushed(DataContextMergeHandler.java:
    > 114)
    > sun.reflect.GeneratedMethodAccessor65.invoke(Unknown Source)
    > sun
    > .reflect
    > .DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl
    > .invoke(DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.java:25)
    > java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:597)
    > org.apache.cayenne.util.Invocation.fire(Invocation.java:204)
    > org.apache.cayenne.event.EventManager
    > $Dispatch.fire(EventManager.java:397)
    > org
    > .apache.cayenne.event.DispatchQueue.dispatchEvent(DispatchQueue.java:
    > 162)
    > org
    > .apache.cayenne.event.DispatchQueue.dispatchEvent(DispatchQueue.java:
    > 58)
    > - locked org.apache.cayenne.event.DispatchQueu..2d553e
    > org
    > .apache.cayenne.event.EventManager.dispatchEvent(EventManager.java:
    > 336)
    > org.apache.cayenne.event.EventManager.postEvent(EventManager.java:307)
    > org
    > .apache
    > .cayenne
    > .access.DataContext.fireDataChannelCommitted(DataContext.java:1680)
    > org.apache.cayenne.access.DataContext.flushToParent(DataContext.java:
    > 1247)
    > - locked org.apache.cayenne.access.ObjectStor..37958b
    > org
    > .apache.cayenne.access.DataContext.onContextFlush(DataContext.java:
    > 1192)
    > org.apache.cayenne.access.DataContext.onSync(DataContext.java:1167)
    > org.apache.cayenne.access.DataContext.flushToParent(DataContext.java:
    > 1234)
    > - locked org.apache.cayenne.access.ObjectStor..b3a10d
    > org.apache.cayenne.access.DataContext.commitChanges(DataContext.java:
    > 1138)
    > com.ptb.confignode.ConfigNode.newConfigGenerated(ConfigNode.java:711)
    > - locked java.lang.Boolea..b13c5
    > com
    > .ptb
    > .confignode
    > .tasks.GenerateNewDistribution.run(GenerateNewDistribution.java:162)
    > java.util.TimerThread.mainLoop(Timer.java:512)
    > java.util.TimerThread.run(Timer.java:462)
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > Name: Timer-4
    > State: BLOCKED on org.apache.cayenne.access.ObjectStor..b3a10d
    > owned by: Timer-0
    > Total blocked: 20 Total waited: 799
    >
    > Stack trace:
    > org
    > .apache
    > .cayenne
    > .access
    > .DataContextMergeHandler.graphChanged(DataContextMergeHandler.java:99)
    > sun.reflect.GeneratedMethodAccessor69.invoke(Unknown Source)
    > sun
    > .reflect
    > .DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl
    > .invoke(DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.java:25)
    > java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:597)
    > org.apache.cayenne.util.Invocation.fire(Invocation.java:204)
    > org.apache.cayenne.event.EventManager
    > $Dispatch.fire(EventManager.java:397)
    > org
    > .apache.cayenne.event.DispatchQueue.dispatchEvent(DispatchQueue.java:
    > 162)
    > org
    > .apache.cayenne.event.DispatchQueue.dispatchEvent(DispatchQueue.java:
    > 58)
    > - locked org.apache.cayenne.event.DispatchQueu..25268
    > org
    > .apache.cayenne.event.EventManager.dispatchEvent(EventManager.java:
    > 336)
    > org.apache.cayenne.event.EventManager.postEvent(EventManager.java:307)
    > org
    > .apache
    > .cayenne.access.DataContext.fireDataChannelChanged(DataContext.java:
    > 1704)
    > org
    > .apache.cayenne.access.DataContext.onContextFlush(DataContext.java:
    > 1189)
    > org.apache.cayenne.access.DataContext.onSync(DataContext.java:1167)
    > org.apache.cayenne.access.DataContext.flushToParent(DataContext.java:
    > 1234)
    > - locked org.apache.cayenne.access.ObjectStor..86d2f
    > org.apache.cayenne.access.DataContext.commitChanges(DataContext.java:
    > 1138)
    > com
    > .ptb
    > .commons.db.services.StatsServices.addForClient(StatsServices.java:42)
    > com
    > .ptb
    > .backendnode
    > .tasks.DataMgrStatsCalculation.run(DataMgrStatsCalculation.java:78)
    > java.util.TimerThread.mainLoop(Timer.java:512)
    > java.util.TimerThread.run(Timer.java:462)
    >
    >
    >
    > Thanks!
    >
    >
    > Michael Gentry escribió:
    >>
    >> Hi Álvaro,
    >>
    >> Creating a DataContext is a fairly cheap operation. I would suggest
    >> creating them as you need them and not try to optimize this operation
    >> at this point. If you run into bottlenecks in the future, then maybe
    >> look at other options, but there is a good chance that creating extra
    >> DataContexts will not be the source of a performance problem.
    >>
    >> /dev/mrg
    >>
    >>
    >> On Jan 7, 2008 10:30 AM, Álvaro Martínez
    >> <alvaro_martine..tbsl.com> wrote:
    >>
    >>> Thanks, Andrus and Philip
    >>>
    >>> The threads I'm talking about are created from many sources and for
    >>> different reasons. Not of all them are triggered in response to
    >>> "something". There are also watchers, periodic tasks... So I can't
    >>> map
    >>> data contexts to some particular condition.
    >>>
    >>> So then I have to create one data context per operation (that
    >>> means a
    >>> set of actions). Is this expensive? We are developing a heavy loaded
    >>> cluster of servers, so it's important.
    >>>
    >>> Thanks again!
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> Andrus Adamchik escribió:
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>> Hi Álvaro,
    >>>>
    >>>> It is hard to give a precise advice on multithreading without
    >>>> knowing
    >>>> the nature of your application. So here is a few general notes:
    >>>>
    >>>> * DataContext instance is your isolated area for making in-memory
    >>>> changes to objects that will all be committed at once. So consider
    >>>> using multiple contexts as appropriate. Cayenne docs recommend
    >>>> various
    >>>> common patterns, such as DataContext per session (i.e. each user
    >>>> has a
    >>>> dedicated context), DataContext per request, or DataContext per
    >>>> application (in a read-only app). You can also devise your own
    >>>> approach, if none of the above fit your needs. All you need to know
    >>>> here is that multiple threads *reading* from a shared DataContext
    >>>> is
    >>>> ok, but multiple threads *writing* to a shared DataContext is not
    >>>> ok.
    >>>>
    >>>> * In a rare case if you really need multiple threads to work off of
    >>>> the same context, consider using a dedicated nested DataContext for
    >>>> each atomic object modifications.
    >>>>
    >>>> Andrus
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> On Jan 7, 2008, at 2:44 PM, Álvaro Martínez wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>> Hi, I've been working for a while with Cayenne but never
    >>>>> realized I
    >>>>> had a problem... until I got a weird exception.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> The fact is that I had been using context.newObject() and
    >>>>> context.commitChanges() to create new rows in the database. But my
    >>>>> application works with many threads, so global commits can (and in
    >>>>> fact do) interrupt normal creation of objects. Thread A and
    >>>>> Thread B
    >>>>> are creating objects and filling their fields, but then B
    >>>>> commits all
    >>>>> and A throws a validation exception because mandatory fields are
    >>>>> missing.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> How could I commit only one object?
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Thanks,
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Álvaro from Spain (Push the button Inc.)
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>
    >>
    >



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0.0 : Tue Jan 08 2008 - 09:09:16 EST