Re: Ignite graceful shutdown

Hi I would like to continue this conversation What is the best way to perform a rolling restart of Ignite nodes to guarantee no data loss? I think Ignite should be able to stop a node in data-safe fashion: wait until all data are moved to another nodes and then stop Can I somehow ask a node to

ReadWriteLock

As far as I can see Ignite does not provide implementation of java.util.concurrent.locks.ReadWriteLock. Could you please advice: is it possible to implement something similar using existent Ignite API? Do you have any plans to implement ReadWriteLock? -- View this message in context: http://a

Re: SELECT with ORDER BY and pagination

This is very bad news for us :( Could you please give me reference to jira ticket. I need to track it -- View this message in context: http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/SELECT-with-ORDER-BY-and-pagination-tp9037p9111.html Sent from the Apache Ignite Users mailing list archive at N

Re: Explicit lock whithin a transaction

Would you please evaluate another variant: use READ_COMMITTED mode and invoke an EntryProcessor to acquire explicit lock -- View this message in context: http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/Explicit-lock-whithin-a-transaction-tp8586p9106.html Sent from the Apache Ignite Users mailin

Re: Two-phase commit failure recovery

Can I be sure that in case of commit failure Ignite will always invoke CacheStore.load() for all invalidated objects? -- View this message in context: http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/Two-phase-commit-failure-recovery-tp9040p9103.html Sent from the Apache Ignite Users mailing list

Re: Explicit lock whithin a transaction

I guess we could use getAllOutTx for read-only objects. But honestly it looks like nasty hack Explicit ReadAndLock semantic is widely used in relational databases and other frameworks. I beleive Ignite should also provide it. -- View this message in context: http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x

Re: Two-phase commit failure recovery

We do use CacheStore write-through methods. Data are flushed to Kafka which is used as intermediate persistent queue; data from the Kafka is written into relational database asyncroniously. So from Ignite perspective it looks like write-through, but in fact this is fault-tolerant write-behind. W

Re: Two-phase commit failure recovery

We use SQL queries that's why we have to pre-load all data. For data loading we use IgniteDataStreamer and don't use CacheStore. In case of two-phase commit failure Ignite will not be able to automatically reload invalidated data -- View this message in context: http://apache-ignite-users.70

Re: Explicit lock whithin a transaction

I do know objects which I'm going to update in advance, but I don't know objects which I'm going to read. The getAllOutTx() can be used, but I don't like it. First of all performance would be much worse (it involves inter-thread async communication). I need read lot of objects but only very few o

Re: Two-phase commit failure recovery

Problem is we can't use standart cache loading due to http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/SQL-query-against-cache-with-read-through-CacheStore-td9039.html We need implement some custom logic to handle this situation: report the problem to administrator, switch-off cache usage, invalidate

Re: Explicit lock whithin a transaction

Yes I read and don't update some other objects. It would be very difficult to read objectsoutside of transaction. I need to execute qute complicated logic within transacttion. During the execution I can read/update many objects depending on conditions, settings and so on. I can't know which objects

Re: Explicit lock whithin a transaction

PESSIMISTIC-READ_COMMITTED locks ALL objects I read in transaction. It's overkill I need to readAndLock for some objects and readWithoutLock for others -- View this message in context: http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/Explicit-lock-whithin-a-transaction-tp8586p9054.html Sent from

Re: SELECT with ORDER BY and pagination

How pagination works with ORDER BY? Shouldn't client node gets results from all nodes, merge them and re-sort? -- View this message in context: http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/SELECT-with-ORDER-BY-and-pagination-tp9037p9048.html Sent from the Apache Ignite Users mailing list ar

Two-phase commit failure recovery

I have read the block http://gridgain.blogspot.co.uk/2014/09/two-phase-commit-for-in-memory-caches.html. It is great! But I still have questions. / Whenever we cannot tell whether the database commit had happened or not, we can simply reload the relevant data from database into cache upon committi

SQL query against cache with read-through CacheStore

Could you please explain what happens when I execute a query against cache which is not fully loaded into Ignate RAM? I suppose result will be not consisent with underlying persistent storage? -- View this message in context: http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/SQL-query-against-ca

SELECT with ORDER BY and pagination

Let's say I execute / select ... from HUGE_REPLICATED_CACHE order by ... / Then I fetch few first record of the result cursor How does it work with pagination? How much RAM do I need at client? -- View this message in context: http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/SELECT-with-ORDER-

Re: Explicit lock whithin a transaction

Example: 1. Read and lock a financial account 2. Check if account balance is enought 3. Check other conditions 4. Move funds 5. Update balance 6. Commit I have to be sure that account balance will not be changed between 1 and 5 -- View this message in context: http://apache-ignite-users.705

Re: Explicit lock whithin a transaction

Please help -- View this message in context: http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/Explicit-lock-whithin-a-transaction-tp8586p8726.html Sent from the Apache Ignite Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Re: Explicit lock whithin a transaction

May be I should use empty EntryProcessor for this? -- View this message in context: http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/Explicit-lock-whithin-a-transaction-tp8586p8647.html Sent from the Apache Ignite Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Re: Explicit lock whithin a transaction

We don't need lock ALL entries on read, only SOME of them. Typically we need lock objects which will be modified latter in the transactions but we don't want lock all read-only objects -- View this message in context: http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/Explicit-lock-whithin-a-tran

Explicit lock whithin a transaction

Hi According to https://apacheignite.readme.io/docs/distributed-locks explicit locks are not transactional and cannot not be used from within transactions We use PESSIMISTIC, READ_COMMITTED transactions. Sometimes it's necessary to read an object and explicitly lock it. In SQL database we do it by

Is IgniteQueue transactional?

Does IgniteQueue support transactions? Test scenario: 1. Start transaction 2. Put message to transactional queue *3. Another thread peeks the queue and gets UNCOMMITED message!* 4. commit TransactionalQueue.java

Re: How getAndPutIfAbsent works within a transaction

In case of optimistic transaction last commit (step 6) will fail? -- View this message in context: http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/How-getAndPutIfAbsent-works-within-a-transaction-tp7819p7830.html Sent from the Apache Ignite Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Re: Adding fields to QueryEntity

This ticket is about dynamic index creation. I'm asking about fields -- View this message in context: http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/Adding-fields-to-QueryEntity-tp7814p7829.html Sent from the Apache Ignite Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

How getAndPutIfAbsent works within a transaction

Hi Let's say we have 2working in parallel: 1. client1: start transaction 2. client2: start transaction 3. client1: getAndPutIfAbsent("key", x); 4. client2: getAndPutIfAbsent("key", x); - will it create new cache entry? 5. client1: commit 6. client2: commit - will it fail? -- View this mes

Adding fields to QueryEntity

Hi Is it possible to add a field to QueryEntity and access the new the field from SQL? I found several references on possibility to add a field to existing cache configuration: https://www.gridgain.com/resources/blog/gridgain-in-memory-data-fabric-7-5-is-released, http://apache-ignite-developers.

Re: SQL Queries - propagate "new" CacheConfiguration.queryEntities over the cluster on an already started cache

Manu wrote > Done. Dear Manu and Ignite Team! Please explain what have you done and how can I use it. In which release it is/will be available? I desperately need possibility to dynamic add entity fields and create/drop index! -- View this message in context: http://apache-ignite-users.70

Re: Query does not include objects added into Cache from within a transaction

JIRA wrote > concurrent SQL query can see partially committed transaction I thought the problem is SQL doesn't see uncommited changes at all (even from my thread). But this means SQL can see some part of uncommited transaction? How it is possible? -- View this message in context: http://apac

Re: Query does not include objects added into Cache from within a transaction

Yes in theory I could know all changes I made. But in practice it will make application logic so much more complicated! E.g in one part of transaction I create an object and in some other part execute query which should include this object in result cursor taking into account WHERE and ORDER BY. D

Re: Query does not include objects added into Cache from within a transaction

I would say it's critical problem. Can you estimate when it will be fixed? (I don't have access to jira) -- View this message in context: http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/Query-does-not-include-objects-added-into-Cache-from-within-a-transaction-tp7651p7703.html Sent from the Apac

Re: Nested Transactions

We have OLTP system based on Oracle. And we havily use the nested transactions We would like to replace Oracle with Ignite. That's why we need all this features: nested transaction, autonomous transactions, DDL ... -- View this message in context: http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.

Re: SQL Queries - propagate "new" CacheConfiguration.queryEntities over the cluster on an already started cache

Great news! Could you please give me a hint how to access this function? -- View this message in context: http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/SQL-Queries-propagate-new-CacheConfiguration-queryEntities-over-the-cluster-on-an-already-started-cae-tp5802p7699.html Sent from the Apache I

Re: Autonomous transaction

Not exactly. Authonomous transaction should see uncommited data of parent transaction -- View this message in context: http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/Autonomous-transaction-tp7672p7698.html Sent from the Apache Ignite Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

RE: Is there limitation on Semaphores and Queues?

Great, many thanks From: Denis Magda [via Apache Ignite Users] [mailto:ml-node+s70518n2484...@n6.nabble.com] Sent: Monday, January 11, 2016 7:01 AM To: akaptsan Subject: Re: Is there limitation on Semaphores and Queues? Anatoly, Yes, a lock will be released automatically if a node that

RE: Is there limitation on Semaphores and Queues?

: Saturday, January 09, 2016 5:30 PM To: akaptsan Subject: Re: Is there limitation on Semaphores and Queues? Anatoly, 1. If you suppose that a contention between threads will be high in case when a single queue is used I can suggest having a number of queues equal to the number of cache

RE: Is there limitation on Semaphores and Queues?

less opened semaphores and queues. But semaphore and queue will be created and closed almost on every change Regards, Anatoly From: Denis Magda [via Apache Ignite Users] [mailto:ml-node+s70518n2455...@n6.nabble.com] Sent: Saturday, January 09, 2016 12:55 PM To: akaptsan Subject: Re: Is

RE: Is there limitation on Semaphores and Queues?

state in DBs would be inconsistent. That’s why I want to use Ignite semaphore From: Denis Magda [via Apache Ignite Users] [mailto:ml-node+s70518n2453...@n6.nabble.com] Sent: Saturday, January 09, 2016 9:26 AM To: akaptsan Subject: Re: Is there limitation on Semaphores and Queues