[infinispan-dev] possible bug in TreeCache.put(Fqn fqn, Map<? extends K, ? extends V> data) when passed an empty map

[Manik Surtani]

On 14 Sep 2010, at 11:08, Galder Zamarreño wrote:

>> 
>> Are you referring to not locking a node when adding or removing a child node?
> 
> This comes from a conversation we had online where I was checking whether there was a real need for TreeCache in this use case.

Right, I thought Scott said he wanted weaker consistency.

> 
> IIRC, parents used to be locked for writing when adding/removing children. Looking at the Infinispan code, this might not be the case any more:
> 
>            // don't lock parents for child insert/removes!
>            icc.getInvocationContext().setFlags(Flag.SKIP_LOCKING);
>            parentStructure.put(fqn.getLastElement(), fqn);
> 
> I see we don't have anything in http://community.jboss.org/wiki/Infinispan wrt the tree module. I think it'd be interesting to explain what the lock semantics are in the tree module and how different these are with JBoss Cache. Thoughts?

+1.  Care to make some notes on this on the wiki?

Cheers
Manik

--
Manik Surtani
manik at jboss.org
Lead, Infinispan
Lead, JBoss Cache
http://www.infinispan.org
http://www.jbosscache.org




-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/infinispan-dev/attachments/20100914/0c018c88/attachment.html