[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BOOKKEEPER-1019?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15945253#comment-15945253
 ] 

Enrico Olivelli commented on BOOKKEEPER-1019:
---------------------------------------------

This issue relates to BOOKKEEPER-874 in that we do not need to force LAC if 
there is an out-of-band way of telling the readers that the entry as been acked 
to the writer

> Support for reading entries after LAC (causal consistency driven by 
> out-of-band communications)
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: BOOKKEEPER-1019
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BOOKKEEPER-1019
>             Project: Bookkeeper
>          Issue Type: New Feature
>          Components: bookkeeper-client
>    Affects Versions: 4.4.0
>            Reporter: Enrico Olivelli
>            Assignee: Enrico Olivelli
>             Fix For: 4.5.0
>
>
> Currently we check in  asyncReadEntries that the range of entries is within 
> the range 0....LastAddConfirmed.
> This is because the LAC guarantees that the client can read only entries that 
> have been acked from the writer.
> The LAC protocol is very useful when there is not direct communication 
> between "writers" and "readers".
> I have an use case in which the "writer" blocks until the write is acked 
> (like addEntry) and then it takes the returned id (ledgerId + entryid) and 
> passes it to a "reader" which in turn tries to read the entry.
> This communication is done out-of-band in respect to BookKeeper and we can 
> assume that the entries has been stored in a durable way (the write as been 
> acked by a quorum of bookies).
> As the 'reader' as received a confirmation the the writer as successifully 
> written the entry it can read it without waiting for the piggyback of the LAC 
> of the standard bookkeeper protocol.
> This is the normal way of working with transactional databases or with 
> filesystems.
> This is kind of "causal consistency".
> The idea is to add a configuration option to relax the check in 
> asyncreadEntries
> this is 4.4 version:
> {code}
>         if (lastEntry > lastAddConfirmed) {
>             LOG.error("ReadException on ledgerId:{} firstEntry:{} 
> lastEntry:{}",
>                     new Object[] { ledgerId, firstEntry, lastEntry });
>             cb.readComplete(BKException.Code.ReadException, this, null, ctx);
>             return;
>         }
> {code}
> this is my proposal:
> {code}
>         if (lastEntry > lastAddConfirmed && 
> !allowReadingAfterLastAddConfirmed) {
>             LOG.error("ReadException on ledgerId:{} firstEntry:{} 
> lastEntry:{}",
>                     new Object[] { ledgerId, firstEntry, lastEntry });
>             cb.readComplete(BKException.Code.ReadException, this, null, ctx);
>             return;
>         }
> {code}



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)

Reply via email to