You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@tinkerpop.apache.org by Jonathan Ellithorpe <jd...@cs.stanford.edu> on 2016/03/11 05:52:10 UTC
[QUESTION] Transaction.readWrite ?
Hi all,
Quick question, is Transaction.readWrite() supposed to be used by
implementers to signal that a read/write is *about* to happen, or that a
read/write *has* happened. The comments indicate the latter:
/**
* An internal function that signals a read or a write has occurred - not
meant to be called directly by end users.
*/
public void readWrite();
But the Neo4j Gremlin implementation is using it in the way of the former
(that is, using it to signal that a read/write is *about* to happen).
Thanks for any clarification on this, want to make sure I'm implementing
transactions in the way that's intended.
Jonathan
Re: [QUESTION] Transaction.readWrite ?
Posted by Jonathan Ellithorpe <jd...@cs.stanford.edu>.
Excellent, thanks
On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 3:05 AM Stephen Mallette <sp...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> I guess the javadoc isn't as clear as it should be. It would be better as:
>
> > An internal function that signals a read or a write is about to occur....
>
> On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 11:52 PM, Jonathan Ellithorpe <jde@cs.stanford.edu
> >
> wrote:
>
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Quick question, is Transaction.readWrite() supposed to be used by
> > implementers to signal that a read/write is *about* to happen, or that a
> > read/write *has* happened. The comments indicate the latter:
> >
> > /**
> > * An internal function that signals a read or a write has occurred - not
> > meant to be called directly by end users.
> > */
> > public void readWrite();
> >
> > But the Neo4j Gremlin implementation is using it in the way of the former
> > (that is, using it to signal that a read/write is *about* to happen).
> >
> > Thanks for any clarification on this, want to make sure I'm implementing
> > transactions in the way that's intended.
> >
> > Jonathan
> >
>
Re: [QUESTION] Transaction.readWrite ?
Posted by Stephen Mallette <sp...@gmail.com>.
I guess the javadoc isn't as clear as it should be. It would be better as:
> An internal function that signals a read or a write is about to occur....
On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 11:52 PM, Jonathan Ellithorpe <jd...@cs.stanford.edu>
wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Quick question, is Transaction.readWrite() supposed to be used by
> implementers to signal that a read/write is *about* to happen, or that a
> read/write *has* happened. The comments indicate the latter:
>
> /**
> * An internal function that signals a read or a write has occurred - not
> meant to be called directly by end users.
> */
> public void readWrite();
>
> But the Neo4j Gremlin implementation is using it in the way of the former
> (that is, using it to signal that a read/write is *about* to happen).
>
> Thanks for any clarification on this, want to make sure I'm implementing
> transactions in the way that's intended.
>
> Jonathan
>