Hi Andry,
It is look like a mistake:
cache.put(1, new TestVal("old"));
TestVal oldVal = cache.get(1);
oldVal.val = "new";
cache.put(1, oldVal);
You need create new object always.
Try to do like this:
cache.put(1, new TestVal("old"));
cache.put(1, new TestVal("new"));
Otherwise you can to get strange behavior, in particular if you are using
copyOnRead - false.
On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 4:03 PM, Andry <andrykoro...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> We're trying to use Continuous Query to handle updates on existing object,
> but it looks like as oldValue in Update event is working incorrectly.
>
> Example of our usage:
>
> public class TestContinuousQueryUpdateEvent {
>
> private static class TestVal {
> public String val;
>
> public TestVal(String val) {
> this.val = val;
> }
>
> @Override
> public String toString() {
> return val;
> }
> }
>
> public static void main(String[] args) throws Exception {
> try (Ignite ignite =
> Ignition.start("examples/config/example-ignite.xml")) {
> try (IgniteCache<Integer, TestVal> cache =
> ignite.getOrCreateCache("test")) {
> ContinuousQuery<Integer, TestVal> qry = new
> ContinuousQuery<>();
>
> qry.setRemoteFilterFactory(FactoryBuilder.factoryOf(remoteFilter()));
>
> qry.setLocalListener(evts -> {
> for (CacheEntryEvent<? extends Integer, ? extends
> TestVal> e : evts)
> System.out.println("Local Listener: Event Type = "
> +
> e.getEventType() + ", Old val = " + e.getOldValue() + ", New val = " +
> e.getValue());
> });
>
> cache.query(qry);
>
> cache.put(1, new TestVal("old"));
>
> TestVal oldVal = cache.get(1);
> oldVal.val = "new";
>
> cache.put(1, oldVal);
>
> sleep(1000);
> } finally {
> ignite.destroyCache("test");
> }
> }
> }
>
> private static CacheEntryEventSerializableFilter<Integer, TestVal>
> remoteFilter() {
> return e -> true;
> }
> }
>
> Output:
> Local Listener: Event Type = CREATED, Old val = null, New val = old
> Local Listener: Event Type = UPDATED, Old val = new, New val = new
>
> We expected that oldValue will return actually saved object rather then
> reference to object we have modified in our code.
>
> Please advise how should we deal with this.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context: http://apache-ignite-users.
> 70518.x6.nabble.com/Problem-with-v-for-listening-updates-tp8709.html
> Sent from the Apache Ignite Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
--
Vladislav Pyatkov
