On Oct 14, 10:33 pm, Tom Davies <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In relational database terms, Clojure's STM has 'read-committed'
> isolation when you don't use 'ensure', then?
No, it's snapshot isolation, which is distinct from all of the
traditional isolation levels:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S
In relational database terms, Clojure's STM has 'read-committed'
isolation when you don't use 'ensure', then?
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Clojure" group.
To post to this group, send email to cloj
Thanks for the response, Rich.
I really wanted to eliminate the possibility that the user of my
library would accidentally overlook a ref that needed to be invariant
during a transaction. That solution felt hackish, which is why I
asked. At this point, I'll shift the burden to the programmer to
On Oct 13, 9:51 pm, jim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Rich,
>
> I've been working with refs tonight and I appreciate the validate-fn
> addition. Makes my life a lot easier.
>
> From reading the docs, 'ensure' keeps a ref from changing inside a
> dosync. But if accesses to refs are contained in fu
Rich,
I've been working with refs tonight and I appreciate the validate-fn
addition. Makes my life a lot easier.
>From reading the docs, 'ensure' keeps a ref from changing inside a
dosync. But if accesses to refs are contained in function calls that
are called during the transaction, the progr
