One more question. If I specify TransactionManagerLookup implementation for
cache, but don't use transactions explicitely - will replications due to put
calls be transactional? I.e., who will be the owner of lock on the other side -
transaction or thread?
Regards,
Eugene
View the original post
"[EMAIL PROTECTED]" wrote : No, releaseLocks() will release *all* locks !
| I upgraded that JIRA issue from minor to critical.
That's what I was affraid of. Ok, I'll use deprecated API to get locks and to
understand what locks should I remove.
Anyway, thank you!
Regards,
Eugene
View the orig
"[EMAIL PROTECTED]" wrote : By 'coordinator' I *didn't* mean the JGroups
coordinator, but the coordinator of the 2-phase-commit protocol, so the member
on which a TX.commit() was called.
| 1.3. will be released in Feb/March 2006.
| In the meantime you have to call TreeCache.releaseAllLocks(St
BTW, when 1.3 version will be released approximately?
View the original post :
http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=3908990#3908990
Reply to the post :
http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=3908990
---
Yes, we use synchronous replication and transactions (JOTM). Killed server was
not a coordinator according to logs, but the problem is exactly the same as
what you describe.
So, if I understand correctly, this situation will be fixed in 1.3, when locks
manipulating API will be removed. Before t
"[EMAIL PROTECTED]" wrote : Which server is 192.168.20.90 ? A or B ?
192.168.20.90 is A server. This server is killed and error appears on B server
(192.168.20.91)
Regards,
Eugene
View the original post :
http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=3908986#3908986
Reply to the po
We are testing some fail-over solution and have a problem. Situation is the
following.
There are 2 servers (A and B) with cache instance on each. Server A works with
cache using transactions. Server B just listens for replications. We are
stopping server A (by killing it's process - this emulat
I'm sorry for this disturbance - problem is solved. Of course, I could answer
you questions, but the reason was not in JBossCache - infrastructure problem.
Interface on one of test servers have work in half-duplex mode. Now application
works exellently!
Thank you for your help! And for your li
We have ReplicationException in quite simple situation. I've wrote synthetic
test that illustrates problem.
There are 2 servers in cluster. One just listens, no actions are performed with
cache. Second one emulates our business logic.
| package test;
|
| import org.apache.log4j.Property
Sorry. It was a DNA problem.
Question is closed!
Regards,
Eugene aka Skipy
View the original post :
http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=3893413#3893413
Reply to the post :
http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode
far
as I can understand. Can someone propose correct decision?
Regards,
Eugene aka Skipy
View the original post :
http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=3893019#3893019
Reply to the post :
http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=postin
BTW, I try to use TreeCache.removeAllLocks(Fqn). It works as expected. Call
does through interceptors, thus, read lock can't be acquired on the node by Fqn
specified. This method can't help in write lock release.
Regards,
Eugene aka Skipy
View the original post :
http://loc
But after this fail the following error apper on 10.0.20.91:
| 2005-08-31 13:28:31,292 tcpConnection-6802-7 ERROR
[.jboss.cache.lock.IdentityLock] (t:22896576 u:2642 s:subscriber b:jbroke
| r) read lock for /subscriber/user/2642 could not be acquired by
<10.0.20.91:34864>:60 after 15000 ms
erRequest.java:274)
| at com.caucho.server.TcpConnection.run(TcpConnection.java:139)
| at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:534)
| 2
There was no '/subscriber/user/2642' entry in the cache on 10.0.20.91.
Regards,
Eugene aka Skipy
View the original post :
http://locahost:8080/index.html?mod
dure. I'll
try TreeCache.removeAllLocks(Fqn) within a couple of hours.
Regards,
Eugene aka Skipy
View the original post :
http://locahost:8080/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=3892399#3892399
Reply to the post :
http://locahost:8080/index.html?module=bb&op=p
t somehow the node without acquiring read lock on it?
Regards,
Eugene aka Skipy
View the original post :
http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=3892239#3892239
Reply to the post :
http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&o
I know this. I don't understand why write lock persists AFTER replication is
finished (if it was caused by replication). Because this lock (and read lock
aquisition error!) exists till cache stop. I can try to read value 5 seconds
later, 1 minute later, 1 day later - the node will still be locke
Well, Bela, I would like to clarify what's going on. It's not about eviction (I
switched off eviction and still have the same problem).
I have two servers - A (10.0.20.90) and B (10.0.20.91). I try to read data on
server B (thus, try to obtain read lock). In this situation I have the message
ab
I have the following error when reading data:
| 2005-08-26 13:01:25,316 ERROR [.jboss.cache.lock.IdentityLock] (t:32745911
u:2629 s:subscriber b:jbroker) read lock for /sub
| scriber/user/2629 could not be acquired by <10.0.20.91:34420>:48 after
15000 ms. Locks: Read lock owners: []
| Wr
I have the following message in the log a lot of times:
| 2005-08-26 23:12:55,003 ERROR [.jboss.cache.lock.IdentityLock] () read
lock for /subscriber/user/2629 could not be acquired
| by Thread[Thread-12,5,main] after 15000 ms. Locks: Read lock owners: []
| Write lock owner: <10.0.20.90:4
state fetching on one instance block somehow
replication on another instance?
Thanks in advance!
Regards,
Eugene aka Skipy
View the original post :
http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=3891593#3891593
Reply to the post :
http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&am
27;ve used UserTransaction for all these
operation. Thus, when I've changed my code and start to use your approach,
rollback become successfull and commit from the second node also become
successfull. Thank you!
Regards,
Eugene aka Skipy
View the original post :
http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb
ntQueue-0,6,main],
waitingReaders=0, waitingWriters=0, waitingUpgrader=0)))
|
As far as I understand from this log, transaction is marked as rolled back, but
rollback is not performed. That's strange for me.
Regards,
Eugene aka Skipy
View the original post :
http://www.jboss.org/index.html
nfig file
with my implementation class' name as a value.
3. I use singleton TMService holder to obtain UserTransaction from TMService. I
use this UserTransaction to work with transactions.
If I miss some steps on TreeCache registration with transaction manager?
Regards,
Eugene aka Skipy
Vi
24 matches
Mail list logo
