Re: [infinispan-dev] rethinking ISPN transactions

Is there any reason to use synchronization other than "it's faster"?

IMO, the reasoning for removing synchronizations is the same as item 1 in your proposal, "Async options for commit/rollback". On Tue, Nov 19, 2013 at 6:35 PM, Mircea Markus <mmarkus(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: On Nov 19, 2013, at 4:01 PM, Dan Berindei <dan.berindei(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: > Maybe synchronization support is another thing that we should scrap in 7.0, then? I'd still allow them (sync enlistment is there for a resaon), but have XA+recovery enabled by default and the batching commit should fail if the tx hasn't completed successfully. > > BTW, I've also seen the transaction timeout that Radim mentioned, but only recently. I wonder if we could do anything to increase it for the stress tests. > Cheers, -- Mircea Markus Infinispan lead (www.infinispan.org) _______________________________________________ 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