hi galder and manik, sorry for sending this mail to so many, but we've
ran into a issue that prevents us from further scaling of the
specjenterprise2010 benchmark.
so when doing specjenterprise2010 benchmark testing we've seen a lot of
blocks caused by the entity/query cache. we've been testing
Looking at your profiler snapshot, these locks are in the Hibernate 2nd level
cache implementation for Infinispan. Galder, any ideas?
- M
On 18 Sep 2012, at 13:43, Ståle W. Pedersen wrote:
> hi galder and manik, sorry for sending this mail to so many, but we've ran
> into a issue that preven
Agreed.
This locking appears to be in the 2LC integration code to guard a local
collection though - there must be better, non-blocking ways to guard this - if
it is needed at all for RO entities.
- M
On 18 Sep 2012, at 15:18, Andrig Miller wrote:
> What I find interesting, is that in thi
There seems to be a single (global) reentrant lock which is acquired
on any put; I don't know much about the module design, but there is a
comment close to the lock acquisition mentioning a need to flush an
operations queue to avoid a deadlock.
Could it just make sure to reorder keys, so that deadl
This is code written in JBoss Cache days to deal with situations where
putFromLoad might try to store stale data (if data is deleted in between a
database read and putFromLoad being called).
Indeed this can happen with read only data, and has nothing to do with
clustering.
The original issue i
>> "Jeremy Whiting"
>> Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2012 2:48:37 AM
>> Subject: Re: [infinispan-dev] Issue with cache blocks for local read-only
>> cache
>>
>> This is code written in JBoss Cache days to deal with situations
>> where putFromLo
- Original Message -
> From: "Galder Zamarreño"
> To: "Andrig Miller"
> Cc: "Steve Ebersole" , "John O'Hara"
> , "Jeremy Whiting"
> , "infinispan -Dev List"
> Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2012 6:4
, "infinispan -Dev List"
>>
>> Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2012 6:48:59 AM
>> Subject: Re: [infinispan-dev] Issue with cache blocks for local read-only
>> cache
>>
>>
>> On Sep 19, 2012, at 4:20 PM, Andrig Miller
>> wrote:
>>
&g
sole" , "John O'Hara"
>>> , "Jeremy Whiting"
>>> , "infinispan -Dev List"
>>>
>>> Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2012 6:48:59 AM
>>> Subject: Re: [infinispan-dev] Issue with cache blocks for local read-only
>>
arreño"
>>>> To: "Andrig Miller"
>>>> Cc: "Steve Ebersole" , "John O'Hara"
>>>> , "Jeremy Whiting"
>>>> , "infinispan -Dev List"
>>>>
>>>> Sent: Thursday, S
ot;
>>>> To: "Andrig Miller"
>>>> Cc: "Steve Ebersole" , "John O'Hara"
>>>> , "Jeremy Whiting"
>>>> , "infinispan -Dev List"
>>>>
>>>> Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2012
;>
>>>> - Original Message -
>>>>> From: "Galder Zamarreño"
>>>>> To: "Andrig Miller"
>>>>> Cc: "Steve Ebersole" , "John O'Hara"
>>>>> , "Jeremy Whiting&qu
>> Cc: "Steve Ebersole" , "John O'Hara"
>>>>>> , "Jeremy Whiting"
>>>>>> , "infinispan -Dev List"
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2012 6:48:59 AM
>>>>>&g
>>>>> From: "Galder Zamarreño"
>>>>>>> To: "Andrig Miller"
>>>>>>> Cc: "Steve Ebersole" , "John O'Hara"
>>>>>>> , "Jeremy Whiting"
>>>>>>> , "infinispa
t;>>> - Original Message -
>>>>>>>> From: "Galder Zamarreño"
>>>>>>>> To: "Andrig Miller"
>>>>>>>> Cc: "Steve Ebersole" , "John O'Hara"
>>>>>>>
On 25 Sep 2012, at 16:57, Steve Ebersole wrote:
> Not sure if it is pertinent here (sure seems so to my layman
> understanding), but what we have talked about for many years was
> caching (originally TreeCache) keeping a marker entry around when
> entries are removed from such cases.
That's
gt;>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> - Original Message -
>>>>>>>> From: "Galder Zamarreño"
>>>>>>>> To: "Andrig Miller"
>>>>>>>> Cc: "Steve Ebersole&q
o
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 20 September 2012 17:38, Andrig Miller wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> - Original Message -
>>>>>>&g
On 25 Sep 2012, at 16:41, Galder Zamarreño wrote:
> 3. This is a solution that still requires locking. A lock-free solution,
> where we can capture the version when an entry is going to be deleted (via
> lockItem() implementation in 2LC), and we can compare it with the one from
> the putFromL
Grinovero
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 20 September 2012 17:38, Andrig Miller wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> - Original Message -
>>>>>>&g
drig Miller wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> - Original Message -
>>>>>>>>>> From: "Galder Zamarreño"
>>>>>>>>>> To: "Andrig Miller"
>>>>>&g
21 matches
Mail list logo
