To be precise, I mean a "cache" transaction. On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 1:31 PM, John Blum <[email protected]> wrote:
> W/hat about wrapping the 2 Regions in a transaction? > > On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 1:18 PM, Michael Stolz <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Even if it's across 2 separate regions and the primaries aren't even >> located on the same machine? >> I don't think our guarantee of ordering goes that far. >> >> Two puts on the same key in the same region, yes they will be received in >> order. >> >> Two puts on same or different keys in *different* regions, I don't >> believe so. >> >> >> -- >> Mike Stolz >> Principal Engineer, GemFire Product Manager >> Mobile: 631-835-4771 >> >> On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 4:14 PM, Anilkumar Gingade <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> If its the same thread that did the put; the client (any) will receive >>> it in order...We guarantee event ordering at thread level... >>> >>> -Anil. >>> >>> >>> On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 12:59 PM, Michael Stolz <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> I'd say there's a pretty good chance of the ordering being different >>>> for two different regions. >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Mike Stolz >>>> Principal Engineer, GemFire Product Manager >>>> Mobile: 631-835-4771 >>>> >>>> On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 3:52 PM, Randy May <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Suppose in a client, I do two puts in a particular order: >>>>> >>>>> regionA.put(K,V); >>>>> regionB.put(K,V); >>>>> >>>>> If another client has registered interest on both regions, is there >>>>> any guaranty about the order in which those 2 events are received on that >>>>> client ? If the client is using local cache, could there be a time when >>>>> region B contains the new value but region A contains the old value ? >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> > > > -- > -John > 503-504-8657 > john.blum10101 (skype) > -- -John 503-504-8657 john.blum10101 (skype)
