Bug 142808 - Consider using a flat transaction in CompositeTransactionalCommands
Summary: Consider using a flat transaction in CompositeTransactionalCommands
Status: RESOLVED FIXED
Alias: None
Product: GMF-Runtime
Classification: Modeling
Component: General (show other bugs)
Version: 1.0   Edit
Hardware: PC Linux
: P3 normal
Target Milestone: 1.0   Edit
Assignee: Linda Damus CLA
QA Contact:
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords: investigate, performance
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2006-05-19 13:36 EDT by Christian Damus CLA
Modified: 2010-07-19 21:55 EDT (History)
0 users

See Also:

Attachments
Possible update to the AbstractEditHelper (1.33 KB, patch)
2006-05-19 13:39 EDT, Christian Damus CLA 		no flags Details | Diff
View All Add an attachment (proposed patch, testcase, etc.)

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Christian Damus CLA 2006-05-19 13:36:17 EDT 
It may be worth considering the potential performance benefits of using the new "flat transaction" capability of the CompositeEMFOperation in GMF's CompositeTransactionalCommand, implemented by bug 141051.  This could be especially useful for the command created for DestroyElementRequests, as these are known to be potentially quite large.
Comment 1 Christian Damus CLA 2006-05-19 13:39:27 EDT 
Created attachment 42047 [details]
Possible update to the AbstractEditHelper

Attached a patch that demonstrates the performance impact by updating the AbstractEditHelper to always disable transaction nesting.  It seems to work in the logic example at least, but may not be applicable in all cases.
Comment 2 Linda Damus CLA 2006-05-30 15:59:49 EDT 
Tested and committed the patch.
Comment 3 Richard Gronback CLA 2008-08-13 13:05:28 EDT 
[target cleanup] 1.0 RC4 was the original target milestone for this bug
Comment 4 Eclipse Webmaster CLA 2010-07-19 21:55:27 EDT 
[GMF Restructure] Bug 319140 : product GMF and component
Runtime Common was the original product and component for this bug