Hi, I've just rolled up my sleeves and have started to make my application more robust with conflict resolution.
I am currently using a @RiakVClock in my POJO (I need to think more about whether the read/modify/write approach is preferable or whether I'd have to rearchitect things). I read in the Riak Handbook the recommendation that conflicts are best resolved on read - not write - however the example App.java snipping on the Storing data in Riak<https://github.com/basho/riak-java-client/wiki/Storing-data-in-riak#appjava> page in the Java client's doco uses a resolver on both the store() and fetch()operations. Indeed, if I don't specify my conflict resolver in my store(), things blow up (in my unit test, mind - I'm still getting my head around the whole area so my test may be a bit contrived). However when I use it in both places, my conflicts are being resolved twice. Is this anticipated? My store is: bucket.store(record).returnBody(true). withoutFetch().withResolver(myConflictResolver); and my fetch is: bucket.fetch(id, Record.class).withResolver(myConflictResolver).execute(); The order of operations in my test is: 1. Store new record 2. Fetch the record as firstRecord 3. Fetch the record as secondRecord 4. Modify a field on firstRecord and secondRecord 5. Save firstRecord 6. Save secondRecord - this invokes my resolver with two siblings 7. Read record - this also invokes my resolver with the two siblings Am I missing something? Or is this what's supposed to happen? I'm not too worried - the double-handling is hardly that intensive - but I'm keen to get it right. Thanks in advance, Matt
_______________________________________________ riak-users mailing list riak-users@lists.basho.com http://lists.basho.com/mailman/listinfo/riak-users_lists.basho.com
