On Apr 5, 2011, at 8:33 AM, VP wrote: > >>> I think the policy is quite simple: you don't lock session, if you >>> are only reading session variables. You lock only if you modify >>> session certain variables; and you lock it immediately before you >>> write, and unlock immediately before you write. >> >> If that's your locking policy, I don't see the point of locking at all. > > > As I understand it, currently, reading and writing will lock sessions. > And the point where the lock is acquired is when the control function > is called, and released when it finishes. > > Then, we have a problem: a long running controller function will lock > session even if it is not touching session variables at all. > > This means other controller functions will have to wait for it to > finish. The current remedy is to ask the long-running process to > release lock if it doesn't need it. > > This policy is okay, but not good for reasons argued above. It is > better not acquiring a lock unless you need one than to keeping a lock > unless you don't need it.
My question is: in your locking policy above, what's the purpose of locking at all?
