Manik, it is is asynchronous, by default.

So I definitely think there is something rotten in the kingdom of Eviction.
Since :
1) Eviction is fired in a new thread (I can disable this, no effect)
2) It removes entries from the datacontainer
3) While the datacontainer is 'maybe' asynchronously trying to write entries in the cachestore (using multiple threads!!)

It makes a lot of threads, acting on the same data, at the same time... perfect for race conditions.

Right now, I am loosing data - it is LOST (not written to the cachestore and not available in the datacontainer)

So I think that somehow, entries are evicted from the datacontainer... and the updates to the cachestore are lost somewhere.

I am digging a lot through the code but the good news is that it is very easy to reproduce, use a config like this (note the eviction stuff) :

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>

<infinispan xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance"
xmlns="urn:infinispan:config:4.0">
<global>
<transport
transportClass="org.infinispan.remoting.transport.jgroups.JGroupsTransport">
<properties>
<property name="configurationFile" value="jgroups.xml" />
</properties>
</transport>

</global>

<namedCache name="qi4j">
<transaction
transactionManagerLookupClass="org.infinispan.transaction.lookup.DummyTransactionManagerLookup" />
<clustering mode="distribution">
<l1 enabled="true" lifespan="100000" />
<hash numOwners="1" rehashRpcTimeout="120000" />
</clustering>

<loaders passivation="false" shared="true" preload="false">

<loader class="org.infinispan.loaders.file.FileCacheStore"
fetchPersistentState="false" ignoreModifications="false"
purgeOnStartup="true" purgeSynchronously="true">
<properties>
<property name="location" value="/tmp" />
</properties>
<async enabled="true" threadPoolSize="1" />
</loader>

</loaders>
<deadlockDetection enabled="true" spinDuration="1000"></deadlockDetection>

<eviction strategy="FIFO" wakeUpInterval="1000" maxEntries="2" />

<unsafe unreliableReturnValues="true" />

</namedCache>
</infinispan>

I don't know if it is related to transactions... I will now try to fire eviction manually, as a workaround.


Something that bothers me is the lack of transactional eviction... is it difficult to make it transactional ? And then commit the whole transaction to the cachestore and after completion only, delete the entries from the datacontainer ??

Looks like a design issue ? WDYT ?


Cheers,

Phil


On Thu, Feb 4, 2010 at 10:44 AM, Manik Surtani <manik@jboss.org> wrote:
That is strange since there is no correlation between eviction and the synchronicity of cache stores.  Have you got a reproducible test for this?

Cheers
Manik

On 3 Feb 2010, at 18:37, Philippe Van Dyck wrote:

Thanks Manik,

I have a another problem with eviction, it seems to destroy cache entries, only when I use async.

Of course, all updates are transactional.

Where should I search for clues ? Any idea ?

Here is my config:

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>

xmlns="urn:infinispan:config:4.0">
<global>
<transport
transportClass="org.infinispan.remoting.transport.jgroups.JGroupsTransport">
<properties>
<property name="configurationFile" value="jgroups.xml" />
</properties>
</transport>

</global>

<namedCache name="qi4j">
<transaction
transactionManagerLookupClass="org.infinispan.transaction.lookup.DummyTransactionManagerLookup" />
<clustering mode="distribution">
<l1 enabled="true" lifespan="100000" />
<hash numOwners="1" rehashRpcTimeout="120000" />
</clustering>

<loaders passivation="false" shared="true" preload="false">

<loader class="org.infinispan.loaders.file.FileCacheStore"
fetchPersistentState="false" ignoreModifications="false"
purgeOnStartup="true">
<properties>
<property name="location" value="/tmp" />
</properties>
<async enabled="true" threadPoolSize="3" />
</loader>

</loaders>
<deadlockDetection enabled="true" spinDuration="1000"></deadlockDetection>

<eviction strategy="FIFO" wakeUpInterval="1000" maxEntries="10" />

<unsafe unreliableReturnValues="true" />

</namedCache>
</infinispan>


phil



On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 6:42 PM, Manik Surtani <manik@jboss.org> wrote:
Ugh, good point.  I thought the unit tests would have trapped a dumb-ass mistake like this.

The reason for transforming the name of the bucket is that we usually use hashcodes as the bucket name, which can take Integer.MIN_VALUE to Integer.MAX_VALUE.  These are then translated into Strings, and this becomes the name of the storage unit, e.g., 12345.bucket in the FileCacheStore.  Now filesystems are happy to accept a -12345.bucket but certain cloud storage providers barf when encountering the '-' character.  Hence the transformation to A12345.bucket in some cases.

Cheers
Manik

PS: pushing up a new snapshot as I type, containing this fix + lower verbosity on eviction-related lock timeouts.

On 3 Feb 2010, at 17:16, Philippe Van Dyck wrote:

And BTW, why do it ?

p

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Philippe Van Dyck <pvdyck@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 6:15 PM
Subject: CloudCacheStore Bug
To: infinispan -Dev List <infinispan-dev@lists.jboss.org>


Hi all,

there is a bug in CloudCacheStore that makes me feel like I am the only one using it ;-)

in CR4 : if you change the "-" sign to "A" in getBucketName ... you need to do the opposite somewhere (or call it every time) ;-)

WDYT ?

p

_______________________________________________
infinispan-dev mailing listhttps://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev

--
Manik Surtani
Lead, Infinispan
Lead, JBoss Cache





_______________________________________________
infinispan-dev mailing list
infinispan-dev@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev

_______________________________________________
infinispan-dev mailing list
infinispan-dev@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev

--
Manik Surtani
Lead, Infinispan
Lead, JBoss Cache





_______________________________________________
infinispan-dev mailing list
infinispan-dev@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev