9:32 p.m.
Guys,
Since we had some problems with state transfer and udp exposed recently
[1] I've been experimenting with various solutions ever since. The
problem is essentially rooted at the fact that we are not respecting
JGroups state transfer callback contract by invoking rpcs from setState.
Rpc in question is flipping the gate in JGroupsDistSync(see
StateTransferManagerImpl#mimicPartialFlushViaRPC). I think we can safely
move this rpc to just prior state request is sent to state provider and
to right after state transfer is completed [2].
I wanted to check with people who designed NBST if this change would be
causing a problem. With this change I am getting clean runs in both udp
and tcp testsuite.
Let me know,
Vladimir
[1] https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-1160
[2]
https://github.com/vblagoje/infinispan/commit/c88fb6a12379b809c49d59fcdec...
9:52 a.m.
Hey Vladimir,
Couple of things, did you consider putting that logic in JGroupsTransport rather than
RpcManagerImpl? It looks to be more suited for the first since it's something specific
about the transport.
I think the logic looks cleaner now with mimicPartialFlushViaRPC(stateSender, false)
called within a finally section.
Cheers,
On Jun 14, 2011, at 9:32 PM, Vladimir Blagojevic wrote:
Guys,
Since we had some problems with state transfer and udp exposed recently
[1] I've been experimenting with various solutions ever since. The
problem is essentially rooted at the fact that we are not respecting
JGroups state transfer callback contract by invoking rpcs from setState.
Rpc in question is flipping the gate in JGroupsDistSync(see
StateTransferManagerImpl#mimicPartialFlushViaRPC). I think we can safely
move this rpc to just prior state request is sent to state provider and
to right after state transfer is completed [2].
I wanted to check with people who designed NBST if this change would be
causing a problem. With this change I am getting clean runs in both udp
and tcp testsuite.
Let me know,
Vladimir
[1] https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-1160
[2]
https://github.com/vblagoje/infinispan/commit/c88fb6a12379b809c49d59fcdec...
_______________________________________________
infinispan-dev mailing list
infinispan-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev
--
Galder Zamarreño
Sr. Software Engineer
Infinispan, JBoss Cache
4:01 p.m.
On 11-06-15 3:52 AM, Galder Zamarreño wrote:
Hey Vladimir,
Couple of things, did you consider putting that logic in JGroupsTransport rather than
RpcManagerImpl? It looks to be more suited for the first since it's something specific
about the transport.
I think the logic looks cleaner now with mimicPartialFlushViaRPC(stateSender, false)
called within a finally section.
Hey Galder,
Yes, I suppose we can do that as well and bury flushViaRPC to lower
levels of transport. If there are no side effects I'll go with that option!
Thanks for review!
Vladimir
5:05 p.m.
+1, looks good.
Sent from my mobile phone
On 15 Jun 2011, at 15:01, Vladimir Blagojevic <vblagoje(a)redhat.com> wrote:
On 11-06-15 3:52 AM, Galder Zamarreño wrote:
> Hey Vladimir,
>
> Couple of things, did you consider putting that logic in JGroupsTransport rather than
RpcManagerImpl? It looks to be more suited for the first since it's something specific
about the transport.
>
> I think the logic looks cleaner now with mimicPartialFlushViaRPC(stateSender, false)
called within a finally section.
>
Hey Galder,
Yes, I suppose we can do that as well and bury flushViaRPC to lower
levels of transport. If there are no side effects I'll go with that option!
Thanks for review!
Vladimir
_______________________________________________
infinispan-dev mailing list
infinispan-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev
6:07 p.m.
+1
On 16 Jun 2011, at 16:05, Manik Surtani wrote:
+1, looks good.
Sent from my mobile phone
On 15 Jun 2011, at 15:01, Vladimir Blagojevic <vblagoje(a)redhat.com> wrote:
> On 11-06-15 3:52 AM, Galder Zamarreño wrote:
>> Hey Vladimir,
>>
>> Couple of things, did you consider putting that logic in JGroupsTransport rather
than RpcManagerImpl? It looks to be more suited for the first since it's something
specific about the transport.
>>
>> I think the logic looks cleaner now with mimicPartialFlushViaRPC(stateSender,
false) called within a finally section.
>>
> Hey Galder,
>
> Yes, I suppose we can do that as well and bury flushViaRPC to lower
> levels of transport. If there are no side effects I'll go with that option!
>
> Thanks for review!
>
> Vladimir
> _______________________________________________
> infinispan-dev mailing list
> infinispan-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev
_______________________________________________
infinispan-dev mailing list
infinispan-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev
4950
days inactive
4952
days old
infinispan-dev@lists.jboss.org
4 comments
4 participants
participants (4)
-
Galder Zamarreño -
Manik Surtani -
Mircea Markus -
Vladimir Blagojevic