On 20 Dec 2011, at 18:07, Paolo Romano wrote:
On 12/18/11 9:45 PM, Manik Surtani wrote:
On 10 Dec 2011, at 11:46, Sebastiano Peluso wrote:
- About JTA semantics, what do you mean by the term full? During the
integration of GMU, we have not changed the way a transaction was already
I think Manik is referring to the fact that ISPN's MVCC implementation does
not guarantee serializability.
yes.
___
infinispan-dev mailing list
infinispan-dev@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev
On 12/9/11 4:19 PM, Manik Surtani wrote:
This is very interesting, Paolo. In terms of numbers of RPC, how does
this compare with a classic, non-genuine MVCC we currently have in
Infinispan?
Same number of round. We're using plain 2PC in this case, but we could
plug-in total-order multi-cast
On 12/10/11 11:46 AM, Sebastiano Peluso wrote:
Hi Manik,
in order to provide correct answers to your questions, I want to ask
you the following:
- Why do you say that the current MVCC implementation is non-genuine?
I think that for any transaction T, only the sites that replicate the
data
This is very interesting, Paolo. In terms of numbers of RPC, how does this
compare with a classic, non-genuine MVCC we currently have in Infinispan? I
presume you still support full JTA semantics over GMU?
Cheers
Manik
On 29 Nov 2011, at 13:11, Paolo Romano wrote:
Hi,
within the
Hi,
within the context Cloud-TM project we have developed a new partial
replication algorithm (corresponding to distribution mode of Infinispan)
that guarantees serializability in a very scalable fashion. We have
called the algorithm GMU, Genuine Multiversion Update Serializability,
and
