Hello!
I'm not sure, but I would assume that changes are visible after commit(),
but you can see these changes in any order, and you can see cache a update
without cache b update, for example. This is for committed transactions.
For rolled back transactions, I don't know. I expect you won't be able to
see change as you have described, but won't bet on it.
Regards,
--
Ilya Kasnacheev
чт, 15 окт. 2020 г. в 20:35, VeenaMithare :
> Hi ,
>
> This is in continuation of the below statement on this post :
>
> http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/Lag-before-records-are-visible-after-transaction-commit-tp33787p33861.html
>
> >>Continuous Query itself is not transactional and it looks like it can't
> be
> used for this at the moment. So, it gets notification before other entries
> were committed.
>
> Does this mean we could get dirty reads as updates in continuous query ?
> i.e. for eg if the code is as below:
> 1. Start transaction
> 2. update records of cache a
> 3. update records of cache b
> 4. update records for cache c
> 5. commit
>
> if update of cache a succeeds , but update of cache b fails, will the local
> listener for continuous query for 'cache a' get an update ?
>
> regards,
> Veena.
>
>
> regards
> Veena.
>
>
>
> --
> Sent from: http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/
>
