+1
On 14 May 2013, at 11:08, Manik Surtani wrote:
> +1
>
> On 14 May 2013, at 10:47, Pedro Ruivo wrote:
>
>> OK! if everybody agrees, I'm going to remove from AdvancedCache and from
>> the GlobalConfiguration(Builder). Also, I'm going to remove the "final"
>> modifier from ComponentRegistry
On May 14, 2013, at 9:52 AM, Sanne Grinovero wrote:
> On 14 May 2013 08:33, Dan Berindei wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 8:44 PM, Sanne Grinovero
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 13 May 2013 18:32, Manik Surtani wrote:
On 13 May 2013, at 16:25, Mircea Markus wrote:
>
Thanks again for nice explanation Jonathan!
@Pedro - seems like you're doing the right thing by encouraging people to be
properly paranoid :-)
Otherwise we'd leak tx logs (in infinispan parlance the PrepareCommands in the
recovery cache) which would not be nice.
On 15 May 2013, at 13:32, Jonath
On 05/07/2013 01:38 PM, Manik Surtani wrote:
> On 2 May 2013, at 23:58, Mircea Markus wrote:
>
>> I'd much rather have them in infinispan-quickstart just to keep the
>> infinispan core modules to a minimum.
>> Unless objection, let's move them into the quick-start during the
>> repackaging work
On 05/07/2013 07:00 PM, Dan Berindei wrote:
> That won't help, the moment Tristan sees there are less than 10 PRs
> open he'll come up with a couple more :)
>
Tristan's Salary = PR * €€€
Tristan
___
infinispan-dev mailing list
infinispan-dev@lists.jboss
No, it's out of scope for the TM, at least as far as the JTA/XA specs
are concerned. The TM would not retain any txlog information to allow it
to perform useful recovery anyhow. Usually you just log it in the hope
a human notices and sorts out the mess. Of course properly paranoid
humans do
Hi Jonathan,
In the scope of ISPN-3063 [1] we came to a problem we need some advice on :-)
Would a transaction manager expect/handle this situation: for a transaction the
commit is successful but at a further point the same transaction would be
reported as "in-doubt" to the recovery process. In
