You should be able to do that; i.e. pass a empty map to the TreeCache. I thought the call was caused by like put(k, null). On 10 Sep 2010, at 14:19, Scott Marlow wrote: > Hi, > > I am porting some legacy JBC code (JBoss AS ha-jndi) to Infinispan > (http://anonsvn.jboss.org/repos/jbossas/projects/cluster/ha-server-cache-i...) and ran into a problem that Mircea created ISPN-639 for. > > In discussing ISPN-639 on IRC, Mircea said in reference to ISPN-639 "the > condition only happen in very special situations when a put is not > valid. Are you adding e.g. a null key or a null value in this > operation?" > > Could someone clarify whether it is legal to pass an empty map to > TreeCache.put(Fqn, Map). > > I am currently calling TreeCache.put as follows (in > DistributedTreeManager.createSubcontext(Name name)): > > this.cache.put(newf, new HashMap<String, Binding>()); > > newf is a Fqn (I believe it is a valid one). However, I'm now worried > about passing the empty HashMap as that is probably triggering ISPN-639. > > Thanks, > Scott > > _______________________________________________ > infinispan-dev mailing list > infinispan-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev

On 10 Sep 2010, at 15:10, Scott Marlow wrote: > Great, thanks for the response Mircea! > > That leaves the concurrency concern raised by Galder (also on IRC). The > concern of locking TreeCache parents and children. > > I don't think we need or want more than weak consistency for our > clustered JNDI implementation. Are you referring to not locking a node when adding or removing a child node?

> > Are there any API or configuration tweaks that I should try to reduce > the locking with TreeCache? The current configuration is under > ha-partition here http://pastebin.com/uum95GTG > > What do you think? > > On Fri, 2010-09-10 at 14:38 +0100, Mircea Markus wrote: >> You should be able to do that; i.e. pass a empty map to the TreeCache. I thought the call was caused by like put(k, null). >> On 10 Sep 2010, at 14:19, Scott Marlow wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> I am porting some legacy JBC code (JBoss AS ha-jndi) to Infinispan >>> (http://anonsvn.jboss.org/repos/jbossas/projects/cluster/ha-server-cache-i...) and ran into a problem that Mircea created ISPN-639 for. >>> >>> In discussing ISPN-639 on IRC, Mircea said in reference to ISPN-639 "the >>> condition only happen in very special situations when a put is not >>> valid. Are you adding e.g. a null key or a null value in this >>> operation?" >>> >>> Could someone clarify whether it is legal to pass an empty map to >>> TreeCache.put(Fqn, Map). >>> >>> I am currently calling TreeCache.put as follows (in >>> DistributedTreeManager.createSubcontext(Name name)): >>> >>> this.cache.put(newf, new HashMap<String, Binding>()); >>> >>> newf is a Fqn (I believe it is a valid one). However, I'm now worried >>> about passing the empty HashMap as that is probably triggering ISPN-639. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Scott >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> 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 -- Manik Surtani manik(a)jboss.org Lead, Infinispan Lead, JBoss Cache http://www.infinispan.org http://www.jbosscache.org _______________________________________________ infinispan-dev mailing list infinispan-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev

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(a)jboss.org Lead, Infinispan Lead, JBoss Cache http://www.infinispan.org http://www.jbosscache.org _______________________________________________ infinispan-dev mailing list infinispan-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev