Guillaume, it depends unfortunately. In distributed cases, checking the status of a transaction could mean remote calls. That's why I was saying I'd rather not have the unnecessary overhead if not needed.
On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 9:51 AM, Guillaume Smet <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 2:56 PM, Steve Ebersole <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Personally having entities dirtied as part of a read-only transaction > sounds > > like an application bug to me. We could try to detect a read-only > > transaction state (not sure how we'd do that across all cases) and > > circumvent the flush there, but that would add unnecessary overhead to > > applications that do the right thing. > > They aren't dirtied as part of the read-only transaction per se but I > agree with you it's more an application bug (it's due to the way we're > dealing with empty embedded). > > Just wanted to report it in case it was easy and free to test the > transaction status! > _______________________________________________ hibernate-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev
