On 04/16/2014 05:38 PM, William Burns wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 11:14 AM, Galder Zamarreño <galder(a)redhat.com> wrote:
>> On 11 Apr 2014, at 15:25, Radim Vansa <rvansa(a)redhat.com> wrote:
>>
>>> OK, now I get the picture. Every time we register to a node (whether the
>>> first time or after previous node crash), we receive all (filtered) keys
>>> from the whole cache, along with versions. Optionally values as well.
>> Exactly.
>>
>>> In case that multiple modifications happen in the time window before
>>> registering to the new cache, we don't get the notification for them,
>>> just again the whole cache and it's up to application to decide whether
>>> there was no modification or some modifications.
>> I’m yet to decide on the type of event exactly here, whether cache entry created,
cache entry modified or a different one, but regardless, you’d get the key and the server
side version associated with that key. A user provided client listener implementation
could detect which keys’ versions have changed and react to that, i.e. lazily fetch new
values. One such user provided client listener implementation could be a listener that
maintains a near cache for example.
> My current code was planning on raising a CacheEntryCreatedEvent in
> this case. I didn't see any special reason to require a new event
> type, unless anyone can think of a use case?
When the code cannot rely on the fact that created = (null -> some) and
modified = (some -> some), it seems to me that the user will have to
handle the events in the same way. I don't see the reason to
differentiate between them in protocol anyway.
One problem that has come to my mind: what about removed entries? If you
push the keyset to the client, without marking start and end of these
events (and expecting the client to fire removed events for all not
mentioned keys internally), the client can miss some entry deletion
forever. Are the tombstones planned for any particular version of
Infinispan?
That’s a good reason why a different event type might be useful. By receiving a special
cache entry event when keys are being looped, it can detect that a keyset is being
returned, for example, if the server went down and the Hot Rod client transparently failed
over to a different node and re-added the client listener. The user of the client, say a
near cache, when it receives the first of this special event, it can make a decision to
say, clear the near cache contents, since it might have missed some events.
The different event type gets around the need for a start/end event. The first time the
special event is received, that’s your start, and when you receive something other than
the special event, that’s the end, and normal operation is back in place.
WDYT?
Radim
>
>>> As the version for
>>> entries is incremented per cache and not per value, there is no way to
>>> find out how many times the entry was modified (we can just know it was
>>> modified when we remember the previous version and these versions differ).
>> Exaclty, the only assumption you can make is that the version it’s different, and
that’s it’s a newer version that the older one.
>>
>>> Thanks for the clarifications, Galder - I was not completely sure about
>>> this from the design doc.
>> No probs
>>
>>> Btw., could you address Dan's question:
>>>
>>> "Don't we want to allow the user to pass some data to the filter
factory
>>> on registration?
>>> Otherwise we'd force the user to write a separate filter factory class
>>> every time they want to track changes to a single key."
>>>
>>> I know this was already asked several times, but the discussion has
>>> always dissolved. I haven't seen the final "NO”.
>>> Radim
>>>
>>> On 04/11/2014 02:36 PM, Galder Zamarreño wrote:
>>>> On 04 Apr 2014, at 19:11, William Burns <mudokonman(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 3:29 AM, Radim Vansa <rvansa(a)redhat.com>
wrote:
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I still don't think that the document covers properly the
description of
>>>>>> failover.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> My understanding is that client registers clustered listeners on
one server
>>>>>> (the first one it connects, I guess). There's some space for
optimization,
>>>>>> as the notification will be sent from primary owner to this node
and only
>>>>>> then over hotrod to the client, but I don't want to discuss
it now.
>>>>> There could be optimizations, but we have to worry about reordering
if
>>>>> the primary owner doesn't do the forwarding. You could have the
case
>>>>> of multiple writes to the same key from the clients and lets say
they
>>>>> send the message to the listener after they are written to the
cache,
>>>>> there is no way to make sure they are done in the order they were
>>>>> written to the cache. We could do something with versions for this
>>>>> though.
>>>> Versions do not provide global ordering. They are used, at each node, to
identify an update, so they’re incrementing at the node level, mixed with some other data
that’s node specific to make them unique cluster wide. However, you can’t assume global
ordering based on those with the current implementation. I agree there’s room for
optimizations but I think correctness and ordering are more important right now.
>>>>
>>>>>>> Listener registrations will survive node failures thanks to
the underlying
>>>>>>> clustered listener implementation.
>>>>>> I am not that much into clustered listeners yet, but I think that
the
>>>>>> mechanism makes sure that when the primary owner changes, the new
owner will
>>>>>> then send the events. But when the node which registered the
clustered
>>>>>> listener dies, others will just forgot about it.
>>>>> That is how it is, I assume Galder was referring to node failures
not
>>>>> on the one that registered the listener, which is obviously talked
>>>>> about in the next point.
>>>> That’s correct.
>>>>
>>>>>>> When a client detects that the server which was serving the
events is
>>>>>>> gone, it needs to resend it's registration to one of the
nodes in the
>>>>>>> cluster. Whoever receives that request will again loop
through its contents
>>>>>>> and send an event for each entry to the client.
>>>>>> Will that be all entries in the whole cache, or just from some
node? I guess
>>>>>> that the first is correct. So, as soon as one node dies, all
clients will be
>>>>>> bombarded by the full cache content (ok, filtered). Even if these
entries
>>>>>> have not changed, because the cluster can't know.
>>>>> The former being that the entire filtered/converted contents will be
sent over.
>>>> Indeed the former, but the entire entry, only keys, and latest versions,
will be sent by default. Converters can be used to send value side too.
>>>>
>>>>>>> This way the client avoids loosing events. Once all entries
have been
>>>>>>> iterated over, on-going events will be sent to the client.
>>>>>>> This way of handling failure means that clients will receive
at-least-once
>>>>>>> delivery of cache updates. It might receive multiple events
for the cache
>>>>>>> update as a result of topology changes handling.
>>>>>> So, if there are several modifications before the client
reconnects and the
>>>>>> new target registers the listener, the clients will get only
notification
>>>>>> about the last modification, or rather just the entry content,
right?
>>>> @Radim, you don’t get the content by default. You only get the key and
the last version number. If the client wants, it can retrieve the value too, or using a
custom converter, it can send back the value, but this is optional.
>>>>
>>>>> This is all handled by the embedded cluster listeners though. But
the
>>>>> end goal is you will only receive 1 event if the modification comes
>>>>> before value was retrieved from the remote node or 2 if afterwards.
>>>>> Also these modifications are queued by key and so if you had
multiple
>>>>> modifications before it retrieved the value it would only give you
the
>>>>> last one.
>>>>>
>>>>>> Radim
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 04/02/2014 01:14 PM, Galder Zamarreño wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I've finally managed to get around to updating the remote hot
rod event
>>>>>> design wiki [1].
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The biggest changes are related to piggybacking on the cluster
listeners
>>>>>> functionality in order to for registration/deregistration of
listeners and
>>>>>> handling failure scenarios. This should simplify the actual
implementation
>>>>>> on the Hot Rod side.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Based on feedback, I've also changed some of the class names
so that it's
>>>>>> clearer what's client side and what's server side.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> A very important change is the fact that source id information
has gone.
>>>>>> This is primarily because near-cache like implementations cannot
make
>>>>>> assumptions on what to store in the near caches when the client
invokes
>>>>>> operations. Such implementations need to act purely on the events
received.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Finally, a filter/converter plugging mechanism will be done via
factory
>>>>>> implementations, which provide more flexibility on the way
filter/converter
>>>>>> instances are created. This opens the possibility for
filter/converter
>>>>>> factory parameters to be added to the protocol and passed, after
>>>>>> unmarshalling, to the factory callbacks (this is not included
right now).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I hope to get started on this in the next few days, so feedback
at this
>>>>>> point is crucial to get a solid first release.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [1]
https://github.com/infinispan/infinispan/wiki/Remote-Hot-Rod-Events
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Galder Zamarreño
>>>>>> galder(a)redhat.com
>>>>>>
twitter.com/galderz
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Project Lead, Escalante
>>>>>>
http://escalante.io
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Engineer, Infinispan
>>>>>>
http://infinispan.org
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> infinispan-dev mailing list
>>>>>> infinispan-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>>>>>>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Radim Vansa <rvansa(a)redhat.com>
>>>>>> JBoss DataGrid QA
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> 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
>>>> --
>>>> Galder Zamarreño
>>>> galder(a)redhat.com
>>>>
twitter.com/galderz
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> infinispan-dev mailing list
>>>> infinispan-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>>>>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev
>>>
>>> --
>>> Radim Vansa <rvansa(a)redhat.com>
>>> JBoss DataGrid QA
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> infinispan-dev mailing list
>>> infinispan-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>>>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev
>>
>> --
>> Galder Zamarreño
>> galder(a)redhat.com
>>
twitter.com/galderz
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
--
Radim Vansa <rvansa(a)redhat.com>
JBoss DataGrid QA
_______________________________________________
infinispan-dev mailing list
infinispan-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev