Hi Gili
First of all thank you for your post. I see what you mean. But still, in my example there is clearly a dirty-read, at least from the cache point of view: T2 is using a new value updated by T1, value that may never be commited, and also T2 commits before T1 commits. It is matchig the javadoc read-only definition.
Waiting for your opinion on this strict scenario at cache level.
Thanks.
[Message sent by forum member 'vladbalan' (vladbalan)]
http://forums.java.net/jive/thread.jspa?messageID=315825