Going back to your original question Galder, the exception is most
likely thrown because of this sequence of events:
0. Given a cluster {A, B}, a key k and a node C joining.
1. Put acquires the "transaction lock" on node A (blocking rehashing)
2. Put acquires lock for key k on node A
3. Rehashing
On 11 Sep 2011, at 16:40, Joni Hahkala wrote:
> On 07/09/2011 18:04, Manik Surtani wrote:
>> On 2 Sep 2011, at 13:04, Joni Hahkala wrote:
>>
>>> Is there any performance numbers for infinispan? What kind of response
>>> times would be required from secure version and what they are now etc?
>> No
Hi Kapil
After reading through this again, it is indeed an interesting use case. My
comments inline:
On 9 Sep 2011, at 05:23, kapil nayar wrote:
> We have two data sets {A1, A2, A3...} and {B1, B2, B3...}
> Each B has some associated data {C1, C2, C3} which has 1:1 mapping.
>
> The mapp
On Sep 13, 2011, at 12:24 PM, Sanne Grinovero wrote:
> On 13 September 2011 11:25, Galder Zamarreño wrote:
>>
>> On Sep 12, 2011, at 1:32 PM, Sanne Grinovero wrote:
>>
>>> I've added a new table as suggested by Galder, and sent a pull request
>>> to constrain Query in the range I just defined
So I've been hacking on versioned entries for a bit now, and want to run the
designs by everyone. Adding an EntryVersion to each entry is easy, making this
optional and null by default easy too, and a SimpleVersion a wrapper around a
long and a PartitionTolerantVersion being a vector clock imple
On 13 Sep 2011, at 00:03, Sanne Grinovero wrote:
> Hi,
> I'm not suggesting that the classloader is completely ignored; it is
> indeed evaluated at the first invocation but then if the following
> method is invoked again with a different classloader as argument, it
> will return the previously ca
On 14 September 2011 17:37, Manik Surtani wrote:
>
> On 13 Sep 2011, at 00:03, Sanne Grinovero wrote:
>> For example, I suspect that you won't be able to deploy an Hibernate
>> Search application (or Infinispan Query) and then deploy a Hibernate
>> OGM based application in the same container.
>> B
Hi,
ATM I cannot enable both batching and auto-commit[1] because the way the
batching is implemented:
- it starts a tx, suspends it and and holds it in a thread local so that when a
put arrives it can resume it
- when I do a put in a batch, the auto-commit code which runs first doesn't see
any
On 14 Sep 2011, at 17:01, Mircea Markus wrote:
> Is there any reasons why the batch container/interceptor doesn't want to
> expose the batch induced transaction to the outside world? The only drawback
> I see with that is if some other XA resource is used within the batch, it
> will participa
Wouldn't the node performing the operation always do an RPC anyway iff
the intended operation is to replace a specific value?
Examples:
- If I do a put() operation which doesn't skip the return value, the
RPC has to be perfomed, we get the current version value which is what
we will check to be
10 matches
Mail list logo
