On the transaction side, we can start without them.

On Tue 2013-11-12 14:34, Davide D'Alto wrote: > Hi, > I'm working on the integration between HotRod and OGM. > > We already have a dialect for Inifinispan and I'm trying to follow the same > logic. > At the moment I'm having two problems: > > 1) In the Infinispan dialect we are using the AtomicMap and the > AtomicMapLookup but this classes don't work with the RemoteCache. Is there > an equivalent for HotRod? > > 2) As far as I know HotRod does not support transactions. I've found a link > to a branch on Mircea repository: > https://github.com/mmarkus/ops_over_hotrod/wiki/Usage-guide > Is this something I could/should use? > > Any help is appreciated. > > Thanks, > Davide > _______________________________________________ > 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

Someone mentioned the grouping API as some sort of alternative to AtomicMap. Maybe we should use that? Note that if we don't have a fine-grained approach we will need to make sure we *copy* the complex data structure upon reads to mimic proper transaction isolation. On Tue 2013-11-12 15:14, Sanne Grinovero wrote: > On 12 November 2013 14:54, Emmanuel Bernard <emmanuel(a)hibernate.org&gt; wrote: >> On the transaction side, we can start without them. > > +1 on omitting transactions for now. > > And on the missing AtomicMaps, I hope the Infinispan will want to implement it? > Would be good to eventually converge on similar featuresets on remote > vs embedded APIs. > > I know the embedded version relies on batching/transactions, but I > guess we could obtain a similar effect with some ad-hoc commands in > Hot Rod? > > Sanne > >> >> On Tue 2013-11-12 14:34, Davide D'Alto wrote: >>> Hi, >>> I'm working on the integration between HotRod and OGM. >>> >>> We already have a dialect for Inifinispan and I'm trying to follow the same >>> logic. >>> At the moment I'm having two problems: >>> >>> 1) In the Infinispan dialect we are using the AtomicMap and the >>> AtomicMapLookup but this classes don't work with the RemoteCache. Is there >>> an equivalent for HotRod? >>> >>> 2) As far as I know HotRod does not support transactions. I've found a link >>> to a branch on Mircea repository: >>> https://github.com/mmarkus/ops_over_hotrod/wiki/Usage-guide >>> Is this something I could/should use? >>> >>> Any help is appreciated. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Davide >> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> 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 > _______________________________________________ > 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

> Neither the grouping API nor the AtomicMap work over hotrod. > Between the grouping API and AtomicMap, I think the one that would make more sense migrating is the grouping API. > One way or the other, I think the hotrod protocol would require an enhancement - mind raising a JIRA for that? > For now I guess you can sacrifice performance and always sending the entire object across on every update instead of only the deltas? Doesn't Hot Rod even have support for deltas? Our main concern is not so much performance but to implement the correct isolation: ok we have no transactions, but still we'd be messing with entries which weren't even supposed to be loaded, and this data could get overwritten.

It's an interesting approach that would work fine-ish for entities assuming the Hot Rod client is multi threaded and assuming the client uses Future to parallelize the calls. But it won't work for associations as we have them designed today. Each association - or more precisely the query results to go from an entity A1 to the list of entities B associated to it - is represented by an AtomicMap. Each entry in this map does correspond to an entry in the association. While we can "guess" the column names and build from the metadata the list of composed keys for entities, we cannot do the same for associations as the key is literally the (composite) id of the association and we cannot guess that most of the time (we can in very pathological cases). We could imagine that we list the association row keys in a special entry to work around that but this approach is just as problematic and is conceptually the same. The only solution would be to lock the whole association for each operation and I guess impose some versioning / optimistic lock. That is not a pattern that scales sufficiently from my experience. That's the problem with interconnected data :) Emmanuel On Mon 2013-11-18 23:05, Mircea Markus wrote: > Neither the grouping API nor the AtomicMap work over hotrod. > Between the grouping API and AtomicMap, I think the one that would make more sense migrating is the grouping API. > One way or the other, I think the hotrod protocol would require an enhancement - mind raising a JIRA for that? > For now I guess you can sacrifice performance and always sending the entire object across on every update instead of only the deltas? > > On Nov 18, 2013, at 9:56 AM, Emmanuel Bernard <emmanuel(a)hibernate.org&gt; wrote: > > > Someone mentioned the grouping API as some sort of alternative to > > AtomicMap. Maybe we should use that? > > Note that if we don't have a fine-grained approach we will need to > > make sure we *copy* the complex data structure upon reads to mimic > > proper transaction isolation. > > > > On Tue 2013-11-12 15:14, Sanne Grinovero wrote: > >> On 12 November 2013 14:54, Emmanuel Bernard <emmanuel(a)hibernate.org&gt; wrote: > >>> On the transaction side, we can start without them. > >> > >> +1 on omitting transactions for now. > >> > >> And on the missing AtomicMaps, I hope the Infinispan will want to implement it? > >> Would be good to eventually converge on similar featuresets on remote > >> vs embedded APIs. > >> > >> I know the embedded version relies on batching/transactions, but I > >> guess we could obtain a similar effect with some ad-hoc commands in > >> Hot Rod? > >> > >> Sanne > >> > >>> > >>> On Tue 2013-11-12 14:34, Davide D'Alto wrote: > >>>> Hi, > >>>> I'm working on the integration between HotRod and OGM. > >>>> > >>>> We already have a dialect for Inifinispan and I'm trying to follow the same > >>>> logic. > >>>> At the moment I'm having two problems: > >>>> > >>>> 1) In the Infinispan dialect we are using the AtomicMap and the > >>>> AtomicMapLookup but this classes don't work with the RemoteCache. Is there > >>>> an equivalent for HotRod? > >>>> > >>>> 2) As far as I know HotRod does not support transactions. I've found a link > >>>> to a branch on Mircea repository: > >>>> https://github.com/mmarkus/ops_over_hotrod/wiki/Usage-guide > >>>> Is this something I could/should use? > >>>> > >>>> Any help is appreciated. > >>>> > >>>> Thanks, > >>>> Davide > >>> > >>>> _______________________________________________ > >>>> 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 > >> _______________________________________________ > >> 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 > > 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

We could rely on remote queries? On 19 November 2013 10:31, Emmanuel Bernard <emmanuel(a)hibernate.org&gt; wrote: > This message was a response to a different email discussing the composite > key approach "k1 - a1" "k1 - a2". > > The actual JIRAs are opened : > > * https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-3732 > * https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-3733 > > Emmanuel > > On Tue 2013-11-19 11:22, Emmanuel Bernard wrote: >> It's an interesting approach that would work fine-ish for entities >> assuming the Hot Rod client is multi threaded and assuming the client >> uses Future to parallelize the calls. >> >> But it won't work for associations as we have them designed today. >> Each association - or more precisely the query results to go from an >> entity A1 to the list of entities B associated to it - is represented by >> an AtomicMap. >> Each entry in this map does correspond to an entry in the association. >> >> While we can "guess" the column names and build from the metadata the >> list of composed keys for entities, we cannot do the same for >> associations as the key is literally the (composite) id of the >> association and we cannot guess that most of the time (we can in very >> pathological cases). >> We could imagine that we list the association row keys in a special >> entry to work around that but this approach is just as problematic and >> is conceptually the same. >> The only solution would be to lock the whole association for each >> operation and I guess impose some versioning / optimistic lock. >> >> That is not a pattern that scales sufficiently from my experience. >> That's the problem with interconnected data :) >> >> Emmanuel >> >> On Mon 2013-11-18 23:05, Mircea Markus wrote: >> > Neither the grouping API nor the AtomicMap work over hotrod. >> > Between the grouping API and AtomicMap, I think the one that would make more sense migrating is the grouping API. >> > One way or the other, I think the hotrod protocol would require an enhancement - mind raising a JIRA for that? >> > For now I guess you can sacrifice performance and always sending the entire object across on every update instead of only the deltas? >> > >> > On Nov 18, 2013, at 9:56 AM, Emmanuel Bernard <emmanuel(a)hibernate.org&gt; wrote: >> > >> > > Someone mentioned the grouping API as some sort of alternative to >> > > AtomicMap. Maybe we should use that? >> > > Note that if we don't have a fine-grained approach we will need to >> > > make sure we *copy* the complex data structure upon reads to mimic >> > > proper transaction isolation. >> > > >> > > On Tue 2013-11-12 15:14, Sanne Grinovero wrote: >> > >> On 12 November 2013 14:54, Emmanuel Bernard <emmanuel(a)hibernate.org&gt; wrote: >> > >>> On the transaction side, we can start without them. >> > >> >> > >> +1 on omitting transactions for now. >> > >> >> > >> And on the missing AtomicMaps, I hope the Infinispan will want to implement it? >> > >> Would be good to eventually converge on similar featuresets on remote >> > >> vs embedded APIs. >> > >> >> > >> I know the embedded version relies on batching/transactions, but I >> > >> guess we could obtain a similar effect with some ad-hoc commands in >> > >> Hot Rod? >> > >> >> > >> Sanne >> > >> >> > >>> >> > >>> On Tue 2013-11-12 14:34, Davide D'Alto wrote: >> > >>>> Hi, >> > >>>> I'm working on the integration between HotRod and OGM. >> > >>>> >> > >>>> We already have a dialect for Inifinispan and I'm trying to follow the same >> > >>>> logic. >> > >>>> At the moment I'm having two problems: >> > >>>> >> > >>>> 1) In the Infinispan dialect we are using the AtomicMap and the >> > >>>> AtomicMapLookup but this classes don't work with the RemoteCache. Is there >> > >>>> an equivalent for HotRod? >> > >>>> >> > >>>> 2) As far as I know HotRod does not support transactions. I've found a link >> > >>>> to a branch on Mircea repository: >> > >>>> https://github.com/mmarkus/ops_over_hotrod/wiki/Usage-guide >> > >>>> Is this something I could/should use? >> > >>>> >> > >>>> Any help is appreciated. >> > >>>> >> > >>>> Thanks, >> > >>>> Davide >> > >>> >> > >>>> _______________________________________________ >> > >>>> 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 >> > >> _______________________________________________ >> > >> 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 >> > >> > 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 > _______________________________________________ > 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

It's an interesting approach that would work fine-ish for entities assuming the Hot Rod client is multi threaded and assuming the client uses Future to parallelize the calls.

But it won't work for associations as we have them designed today. Each association - or more precisely the query results to go from an entity A1 to the list of entities B associated to it - is represented by an AtomicMap. Each entry in this map does correspond to an entry in the association. While we can "guess" the column names and build from the metadata the list of composed keys for entities, we cannot do the same for associations as the key is literally the (composite) id of the association and we cannot guess that most of the time (we can in very pathological cases). We could imagine that we list the association row keys in a special entry to work around that but this approach is just as problematic and is conceptually the same. The only solution would be to lock the whole association for each operation and I guess impose some versioning / optimistic lock. That is not a pattern that scales sufficiently from my experience.

That's the problem with interconnected data :) Emmanuel On Mon 2013-11-18 23:05, Mircea Markus wrote: > Neither the grouping API nor the AtomicMap work over hotrod. > Between the grouping API and AtomicMap, I think the one that would make more sense migrating is the grouping API. > One way or the other, I think the hotrod protocol would require an enhancement - mind raising a JIRA for that? > For now I guess you can sacrifice performance and always sending the entire object across on every update instead of only the deltas? > > On Nov 18, 2013, at 9:56 AM, Emmanuel Bernard <emmanuel(a)hibernate.org&gt; wrote: > >> Someone mentioned the grouping API as some sort of alternative to >> AtomicMap. Maybe we should use that? >> Note that if we don't have a fine-grained approach we will need to >> make sure we *copy* the complex data structure upon reads to mimic >> proper transaction isolation. >> >> On Tue 2013-11-12 15:14, Sanne Grinovero wrote: >>> On 12 November 2013 14:54, Emmanuel Bernard <emmanuel(a)hibernate.org&gt; wrote: >>>> On the transaction side, we can start without them. >>> >>> +1 on omitting transactions for now. >>> >>> And on the missing AtomicMaps, I hope the Infinispan will want to implement it? >>> Would be good to eventually converge on similar featuresets on remote >>> vs embedded APIs. >>> >>> I know the embedded version relies on batching/transactions, but I >>> guess we could obtain a similar effect with some ad-hoc commands in >>> Hot Rod? >>> >>> Sanne >>> >>>> >>>> On Tue 2013-11-12 14:34, Davide D'Alto wrote: >>>>> Hi, >>>>> I'm working on the integration between HotRod and OGM. >>>>> >>>>> We already have a dialect for Inifinispan and I'm trying to follow the same >>>>> logic. >>>>> At the moment I'm having two problems: >>>>> >>>>> 1) In the Infinispan dialect we are using the AtomicMap and the >>>>> AtomicMapLookup but this classes don't work with the RemoteCache. Is there >>>>> an equivalent for HotRod? >>>>> >>>>> 2) As far as I know HotRod does not support transactions. I've found a link >>>>> to a branch on Mircea repository: >>>>> https://github.com/mmarkus/ops_over_hotrod/wiki/Usage-guide >>>>> Is this something I could/should use? >>>>> >>>>> Any help is appreciated. >>>>> >>>>> Thanks, >>>>> Davide >>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> 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 >>> _______________________________________________ >>> 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 > > 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

From the limited knowledge I have in this area, I have been assuming -

Hi Emmanuel, Just had a good chat with Davide on this and one solution to overcome the shortcoming you mentioned in the above email would be to enhance the hotrod client to support grouping: RemoteClient.put(G g, K k, V v); //first param is the group RemoteClinet.getGroup(G g) : Map<K,V>; It requires an enhancement on our local grouping API: EmbeddedCache.getGroup(G). This is something useful for us in a broader context, as it is the step needed to be able to deprecated AtomicMaps and get suggest them being replaced with Grouping. This approach still has some limitations compared to the current embedded integration: - performance caused by the lack of transactions: this means increased TCP chattiness between the Hot Rod client and the server. - you'd have to handle atomicity, potentially by retrying an operation What do you think? On Dec 3, 2013, at 3:10 AM, Mircea Markus <mmarkus(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: > > On Nov 19, 2013, at 10:22 AM, Emmanuel Bernard <emmanuel(a)hibernate.org&gt; wrote: > >> It's an interesting approach that would work fine-ish for entities >> assuming the Hot Rod client is multi threaded and assuming the client >> uses Future to parallelize the calls. > > The Java Hotrod client is both multithreaded and exposes an Async API. > >> >> But it won't work for associations as we have them designed today. >> Each association - or more precisely the query results to go from an >> entity A1 to the list of entities B associated to it - is represented by >> an AtomicMap. >> Each entry in this map does correspond to an entry in the association. >> >> While we can "guess" the column names and build from the metadata the >> list of composed keys for entities, we cannot do the same for >> associations as the key is literally the (composite) id of the >> association and we cannot guess that most of the time (we can in very >> pathological cases). >> We could imagine that we list the association row keys in a special >> entry to work around that but this approach is just as problematic and >> is conceptually the same. >> The only solution would be to lock the whole association for each >> operation and I guess impose some versioning / optimistic lock. >> >> That is not a pattern that scales sufficiently from my experience. > > I think so too :-) > >> That's the problem with interconnected data :) >> >> Emmanuel >> >> On Mon 2013-11-18 23:05, Mircea Markus wrote: >>> Neither the grouping API nor the AtomicMap work over hotrod. >>> Between the grouping API and AtomicMap, I think the one that would make more sense migrating is the grouping API. >>> One way or the other, I think the hotrod protocol would require an enhancement - mind raising a JIRA for that? >>> For now I guess you can sacrifice performance and always sending the entire object across on every update instead of only the deltas? >>> >>> On Nov 18, 2013, at 9:56 AM, Emmanuel Bernard <emmanuel(a)hibernate.org&gt; wrote: >>> >>>> Someone mentioned the grouping API as some sort of alternative to >>>> AtomicMap. Maybe we should use that? >>>> Note that if we don't have a fine-grained approach we will need to >>>> make sure we *copy* the complex data structure upon reads to mimic >>>> proper transaction isolation. >>>> >>>> On Tue 2013-11-12 15:14, Sanne Grinovero wrote: >>>>> On 12 November 2013 14:54, Emmanuel Bernard <emmanuel(a)hibernate.org&gt; wrote: >>>>>> On the transaction side, we can start without them. >>>>> >>>>> +1 on omitting transactions for now. >>>>> >>>>> And on the missing AtomicMaps, I hope the Infinispan will want to implement it? >>>>> Would be good to eventually converge on similar featuresets on remote >>>>> vs embedded APIs. >>>>> >>>>> I know the embedded version relies on batching/transactions, but I >>>>> guess we could obtain a similar effect with some ad-hoc commands in >>>>> Hot Rod? >>>>> >>>>> Sanne >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Tue 2013-11-12 14:34, Davide D'Alto wrote: >>>>>>> Hi, >>>>>>> I'm working on the integration between HotRod and OGM. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> We already have a dialect for Inifinispan and I'm trying to follow the same >>>>>>> logic. >>>>>>> At the moment I'm having two problems: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 1) In the Infinispan dialect we are using the AtomicMap and the >>>>>>> AtomicMapLookup but this classes don't work with the RemoteCache. Is there >>>>>>> an equivalent for HotRod? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 2) As far as I know HotRod does not support transactions. I've found a link >>>>>>> to a branch on Mircea repository: >>>>>>> https://github.com/mmarkus/ops_over_hotrod/wiki/Usage-guide >>>>>>> Is this something I could/should use? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Any help is appreciated. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>> Davide >>>>>> >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>> 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 >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> 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 >>> >>> 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 > > Cheers, > -- > Mircea Markus > Infinispan lead (www.infinispan.org) > > > > 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

Hi Emmanuel, Just had a good chat with Davide on this and one solution to overcome the shortcoming you mentioned in the above email would be to enhance the hotrod client to support grouping: RemoteClient.put(G g, K k, V v); //first param is the group RemoteClinet.getGroup(G g) : Map<K,V>; It requires an enhancement on our local grouping API: EmbeddedCache.getGroup(G). This is something useful for us in a broader context, as it is the step needed to be able to deprecated AtomicMaps and get suggest them being replaced with Grouping. This approach still has some limitations compared to the current embedded integration: - performance caused by the lack of transactions: this means increased TCP chattiness between the Hot Rod client and the server. - you'd have to handle atomicity, potentially by retrying an operation What do you think? On Dec 3, 2013, at 3:10 AM, Mircea Markus <mmarkus(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: > > On Nov 19, 2013, at 10:22 AM, Emmanuel Bernard <emmanuel(a)hibernate.org&gt; wrote: > >> It's an interesting approach that would work fine-ish for entities >> assuming the Hot Rod client is multi threaded and assuming the client >> uses Future to parallelize the calls. > > The Java Hotrod client is both multithreaded and exposes an Async API. > >> >> But it won't work for associations as we have them designed today. >> Each association - or more precisely the query results to go from an >> entity A1 to the list of entities B associated to it - is represented by >> an AtomicMap. >> Each entry in this map does correspond to an entry in the association. >> >> While we can "guess" the column names and build from the metadata the >> list of composed keys for entities, we cannot do the same for >> associations as the key is literally the (composite) id of the >> association and we cannot guess that most of the time (we can in very >> pathological cases). >> We could imagine that we list the association row keys in a special >> entry to work around that but this approach is just as problematic and >> is conceptually the same. >> The only solution would be to lock the whole association for each >> operation and I guess impose some versioning / optimistic lock. >> >> That is not a pattern that scales sufficiently from my experience. > > I think so too :-) > >> That's the problem with interconnected data :) >> >> Emmanuel >> >> On Mon 2013-11-18 23:05, Mircea Markus wrote: >>> Neither the grouping API nor the AtomicMap work over hotrod. >>> Between the grouping API and AtomicMap, I think the one that would make more sense migrating is the grouping API. >>> One way or the other, I think the hotrod protocol would require an enhancement - mind raising a JIRA for that? >>> For now I guess you can sacrifice performance and always sending the entire object across on every update instead of only the deltas? >>> >>> On Nov 18, 2013, at 9:56 AM, Emmanuel Bernard <emmanuel(a)hibernate.org&gt; wrote: >>> >>>> Someone mentioned the grouping API as some sort of alternative to >>>> AtomicMap. Maybe we should use that? >>>> Note that if we don't have a fine-grained approach we will need to >>>> make sure we *copy* the complex data structure upon reads to mimic >>>> proper transaction isolation. >>>> >>>> On Tue 2013-11-12 15:14, Sanne Grinovero wrote: >>>>> On 12 November 2013 14:54, Emmanuel Bernard <emmanuel(a)hibernate.org&gt; wrote: >>>>>> On the transaction side, we can start without them. >>>>> >>>>> +1 on omitting transactions for now. >>>>> >>>>> And on the missing AtomicMaps, I hope the Infinispan will want to implement it? >>>>> Would be good to eventually converge on similar featuresets on remote >>>>> vs embedded APIs. >>>>> >>>>> I know the embedded version relies on batching/transactions, but I >>>>> guess we could obtain a similar effect with some ad-hoc commands in >>>>> Hot Rod? >>>>> >>>>> Sanne >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Tue 2013-11-12 14:34, Davide D'Alto wrote: >>>>>>> Hi, >>>>>>> I'm working on the integration between HotRod and OGM. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> We already have a dialect for Inifinispan and I'm trying to follow the same >>>>>>> logic. >>>>>>> At the moment I'm having two problems: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 1) In the Infinispan dialect we are using the AtomicMap and the >>>>>>> AtomicMapLookup but this classes don't work with the RemoteCache. Is there >>>>>>> an equivalent for HotRod? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 2) As far as I know HotRod does not support transactions. I've found a link >>>>>>> to a branch on Mircea repository: >>>>>>> https://github.com/mmarkus/ops_over_hotrod/wiki/Usage-guide >>>>>>> Is this something I could/should use? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Any help is appreciated. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>> Davide >>>>>> >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>> 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 >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> 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 >>> >>> 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 > > Cheers, > -- > Mircea Markus > Infinispan lead (www.infinispan.org) > > > > 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

BTW query support on groups (by entry of each group) is an interesting non covered use case today. On 22 Jan 2014, at 14:26, Emmanuel Bernard <emmanuel(a)hibernate.org&gt; wrote: > Conceptually I like the grouping API better than AtomicMap as I don’t have to rely on a specific Infinispan type. > > We do use FineGrainedAtomicMap both for the entity and the association persistence (not AtomicMap). It is particularly critical for how we store the association navigation information. I don’t want one update to literally prevent the whole association from being updated. This is the same semantic a RDBMS has and that’s why Manik and I designed the FGAM requirements. > > So my question is what are the differences between the grouping API and the FGAM in particular for: > > - the amount of data sent back and forth (seems like grouping is sending the data naturally per key as “delta compared to the group" > - the locking level when a new entry is added to the FGAM / Grouping API > - the locking level when a new entry is removed to the FGAM / Grouping API > - the locking level when a new entry is updated to the FGAM / Grouping API > - the overall network verbosity > - does grouping offer the same repeatable read protection that AtomicMap offers within a transaction? > > I think retrying as a transaction workaround is quite fragile. We can offer it as a solution but supporting or encouraging it is another story. Unless each OGM nodes do behave like a transaction but that would be wrong. I am also concerned about reading data form a group that are inconsistent. > > Emmanuel > > On 21 Jan 2014, at 16:07, Mircea Markus <mmarkus(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: > >> Hi Emmanuel, >> >> Just had a good chat with Davide on this and one solution to overcome the shortcoming you mentioned in the above email would be to enhance the hotrod client to support grouping: >> >> RemoteClient.put(G g, K k, V v); //first param is the group >> RemoteClinet.getGroup(G g) : Map<K,V>; >> >> It requires an enhancement on our local grouping API: EmbeddedCache.getGroup(G). This is something useful for us in a broader context, as it is the step needed to be able to deprecated AtomicMaps and get suggest them being replaced with Grouping. >> >> This approach still has some limitations compared to the current embedded integration: >> - performance caused by the lack of transactions: this means increased TCP chattiness between the Hot Rod client and the server. >> - you'd have to handle atomicity, potentially by retrying an operation >> >> What do you think? >> >> >> On Dec 3, 2013, at 3:10 AM, Mircea Markus <mmarkus(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: >> >>> >>> On Nov 19, 2013, at 10:22 AM, Emmanuel Bernard <emmanuel(a)hibernate.org&gt; wrote: >>> >>>> It's an interesting approach that would work fine-ish for entities >>>> assuming the Hot Rod client is multi threaded and assuming the client >>>> uses Future to parallelize the calls. >>> >>> The Java Hotrod client is both multithreaded and exposes an Async API. >>> >>>> >>>> But it won't work for associations as we have them designed today. >>>> Each association - or more precisely the query results to go from an >>>> entity A1 to the list of entities B associated to it - is represented by >>>> an AtomicMap. >>>> Each entry in this map does correspond to an entry in the association. >>>> >>>> While we can "guess" the column names and build from the metadata the >>>> list of composed keys for entities, we cannot do the same for >>>> associations as the key is literally the (composite) id of the >>>> association and we cannot guess that most of the time (we can in very >>>> pathological cases). >>>> We could imagine that we list the association row keys in a special >>>> entry to work around that but this approach is just as problematic and >>>> is conceptually the same. >>>> The only solution would be to lock the whole association for each >>>> operation and I guess impose some versioning / optimistic lock. >>>> >>>> That is not a pattern that scales sufficiently from my experience. >>> >>> I think so too :-) >>> >>>> That's the problem with interconnected data :) >>>> >>>> Emmanuel >>>> >>>> On Mon 2013-11-18 23:05, Mircea Markus wrote: >>>>> Neither the grouping API nor the AtomicMap work over hotrod. >>>>> Between the grouping API and AtomicMap, I think the one that would make more sense migrating is the grouping API. >>>>> One way or the other, I think the hotrod protocol would require an enhancement - mind raising a JIRA for that? >>>>> For now I guess you can sacrifice performance and always sending the entire object across on every update instead of only the deltas? >>>>> >>>>> On Nov 18, 2013, at 9:56 AM, Emmanuel Bernard <emmanuel(a)hibernate.org&gt; wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Someone mentioned the grouping API as some sort of alternative to >>>>>> AtomicMap. Maybe we should use that? >>>>>> Note that if we don't have a fine-grained approach we will need to >>>>>> make sure we *copy* the complex data structure upon reads to mimic >>>>>> proper transaction isolation. >>>>>> >>>>>> On Tue 2013-11-12 15:14, Sanne Grinovero wrote: >>>>>>> On 12 November 2013 14:54, Emmanuel Bernard <emmanuel(a)hibernate.org&gt; wrote: >>>>>>>> On the transaction side, we can start without them. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> +1 on omitting transactions for now. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> And on the missing AtomicMaps, I hope the Infinispan will want to implement it? >>>>>>> Would be good to eventually converge on similar featuresets on remote >>>>>>> vs embedded APIs. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I know the embedded version relies on batching/transactions, but I >>>>>>> guess we could obtain a similar effect with some ad-hoc commands in >>>>>>> Hot Rod? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Sanne >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Tue 2013-11-12 14:34, Davide D'Alto wrote: >>>>>>>>> Hi, >>>>>>>>> I'm working on the integration between HotRod and OGM. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> We already have a dialect for Inifinispan and I'm trying to follow the same >>>>>>>>> logic. >>>>>>>>> At the moment I'm having two problems: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> 1) In the Infinispan dialect we are using the AtomicMap and the >>>>>>>>> AtomicMapLookup but this classes don't work with the RemoteCache. Is there >>>>>>>>> an equivalent for HotRod? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> 2) As far as I know HotRod does not support transactions. I've found a link >>>>>>>>> to a branch on Mircea repository: >>>>>>>>> https://github.com/mmarkus/ops_over_hotrod/wiki/Usage-guide >>>>>>>>> Is this something I could/should use? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Any help is appreciated. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>>> Davide >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>>> 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 >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>> 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 >>>>> >>>>> 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 >>> >>> Cheers, >>> -- >>> Mircea Markus >>> Infinispan lead (www.infinispan.org) >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> 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 _______________________________________________ infinispan-dev mailing list infinispan-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev

On Jan 22, 2014, at 1:26 PM, Emmanuel Bernard <emmanuel(a)hibernate.org&gt; wrote: > Conceptually I like the grouping API better than AtomicMap as I don’t have to rely on a specific Infinispan type. > > We do use FineGrainedAtomicMap both for the entity and the association persistence (not AtomicMap). So you don't use the AtomicMap(vs FGAM) at all? Is there any place in which you require a lock in the whole map to be acquired?

> It is particularly critical for how we store the association navigation information. I don’t want one update to literally prevent the whole association from being updated. This is the same semantic a RDBMS has and that’s why Manik and I designed the FGAM requirements. > > So my question is what are the differences between the grouping API and the FGAM in particular for: > > - the amount of data sent back and forth (seems like grouping is sending the data naturally per key as “delta compared to the group" - we'll only send the (group, key, value) for every group write. The same amount of info is sent for an FGAM.put > - the locking level when a new entry is added to the FGAM / Grouping API > - the locking level when a new entry is removed to the FGAM / Grouping API > - the locking level when a new entry is updated to the FGAM / Grouping API - in the case of grouping the lock object is the tuple (group, key), so the lock granularity is the same as FGAM, which under the hood build an synthetic lock object based on (FGAM, innerKey)

> - the overall network verbosity - same > - does grouping offer the same repeatable read protection that AtomicMap offers within a transaction? - yes, and it actually has a clearer semantics, as the grouping API is entirely built on top of the basic cache operations, instead of being a first class citizen with it's own transaction semantics. > > I think retrying as a transaction workaround is quite fragile. We can offer it as a solution but supporting or encouraging it is another story. Unless each OGM nodes do behave like a transaction but that would be wrong. I am also concerned about reading data form a group that are inconsistent. The grouping API I'm suggesting offers an nicer alternative to the (FG)AM approach that would also work over HotRod. ATM there's no TX support for HotRod so it seems like to be able to support the HotRod and OGM integration fully, we'd need HR transactions as well. Do you think the integration can be done in steps: 1. add grouping over hotrod and integrate with OGM 2. add tx and make the integration use it Or we should wait till 2. and then proceed with the integration?

Hi Emmanuel, Just had a good chat with Davide on this and one solution to overcome the shortcoming you mentioned in the above email would be to enhance the hotrod client to support grouping: RemoteClient.put(G g, K k, V v); //first param is the group RemoteClinet.getGroup(G g) : Map<K,V>;

It requires an enhancement on our local grouping API: EmbeddedCache.getGroup(G). This is something useful for us in a broader context, as it is the step needed to be able to deprecated AtomicMaps and get suggest them being replaced with Grouping.

This approach still has some limitations compared to the current embedded integration: - performance caused by the lack of transactions: this means increased TCP chattiness between the Hot Rod client and the server. - you'd have to handle atomicity, potentially by retrying an operation What do you think? On Dec 3, 2013, at 3:10 AM, Mircea Markus <mmarkus(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: > > On Nov 19, 2013, at 10:22 AM, Emmanuel Bernard <emmanuel(a)hibernate.org&gt; wrote: > >> It's an interesting approach that would work fine-ish for entities >> assuming the Hot Rod client is multi threaded and assuming the client >> uses Future to parallelize the calls. > > The Java Hotrod client is both multithreaded and exposes an Async API. > >> >> But it won't work for associations as we have them designed today. >> Each association - or more precisely the query results to go from an >> entity A1 to the list of entities B associated to it - is represented by >> an AtomicMap. >> Each entry in this map does correspond to an entry in the association. >> >> While we can "guess" the column names and build from the metadata the >> list of composed keys for entities, we cannot do the same for >> associations as the key is literally the (composite) id of the >> association and we cannot guess that most of the time (we can in very >> pathological cases). >> We could imagine that we list the association row keys in a special >> entry to work around that but this approach is just as problematic and >> is conceptually the same. >> The only solution would be to lock the whole association for each >> operation and I guess impose some versioning / optimistic lock. >> >> That is not a pattern that scales sufficiently from my experience. > > I think so too :-) > >> That's the problem with interconnected data :) >> >> Emmanuel >> >> On Mon 2013-11-18 23:05, Mircea Markus wrote: >>> Neither the grouping API nor the AtomicMap work over hotrod. >>> Between the grouping API and AtomicMap, I think the one that would make more sense migrating is the grouping API. >>> One way or the other, I think the hotrod protocol would require an enhancement - mind raising a JIRA for that? >>> For now I guess you can sacrifice performance and always sending the entire object across on every update instead of only the deltas? >>> >>> On Nov 18, 2013, at 9:56 AM, Emmanuel Bernard <emmanuel(a)hibernate.org&gt; wrote: >>> >>>> Someone mentioned the grouping API as some sort of alternative to >>>> AtomicMap. Maybe we should use that? >>>> Note that if we don't have a fine-grained approach we will need to >>>> make sure we *copy* the complex data structure upon reads to mimic >>>> proper transaction isolation. >>>> >>>> On Tue 2013-11-12 15:14, Sanne Grinovero wrote: >>>>> On 12 November 2013 14:54, Emmanuel Bernard <emmanuel(a)hibernate.org&gt; wrote: >>>>>> On the transaction side, we can start without them. >>>>> >>>>> +1 on omitting transactions for now. >>>>> >>>>> And on the missing AtomicMaps, I hope the Infinispan will want to implement it? >>>>> Would be good to eventually converge on similar featuresets on remote >>>>> vs embedded APIs. >>>>> >>>>> I know the embedded version relies on batching/transactions, but I >>>>> guess we could obtain a similar effect with some ad-hoc commands in >>>>> Hot Rod? >>>>> >>>>> Sanne >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Tue 2013-11-12 14:34, Davide D'Alto wrote: >>>>>>> Hi, >>>>>>> I'm working on the integration between HotRod and OGM. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> We already have a dialect for Inifinispan and I'm trying to follow the same >>>>>>> logic. >>>>>>> At the moment I'm having two problems: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 1) In the Infinispan dialect we are using the AtomicMap and the >>>>>>> AtomicMapLookup but this classes don't work with the RemoteCache. Is there >>>>>>> an equivalent for HotRod? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 2) As far as I know HotRod does not support transactions. I've found a link >>>>>>> to a branch on Mircea repository: >>>>>>> https://github.com/mmarkus/ops_over_hotrod/wiki/Usage-guide >>>>>>> Is this something I could/should use? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Any help is appreciated. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>> Davide >>>>>> >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>> 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 >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> 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 >>> >>> 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 > > Cheers, > -- > Mircea Markus > Infinispan lead (www.infinispan.org) > > > > 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

It would also require us to keep a Set<K> for each group, with the keys associated with that group. As such, I'm not sure it would be a lot easier to implement (correctly) than FineGrainedAtomicMap.

On 22 Jan 2014 16:10, "Pedro Ruivo" <pedro(a)infinispan.org&gt; wrote: > > > > On 01/22/2014 01:58 PM, Dan Berindei wrote: > > > > > > It would also require us to keep a Set<K> for each group, with the keys > > associated with that group. As such, I'm not sure it would be a lot > > easier to implement (correctly) than FineGrainedAtomicMap. > > > > > > Dan, I didn't understand why do we need to keep a Set<K>. Can you > elaborate? We'd need some way to keep track of the keys that are part of the group, iterating over the entire cache for every getGroup() call would be way too slow.

On 01/27/2014 09:20 AM, Sanne Grinovero wrote: > On 23 January 2014 18:03, Dan Berindei <dan.berindei(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: >> >> On 22 Jan 2014 16:10, "Pedro Ruivo" <pedro(a)infinispan.org&gt; wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> On 01/22/2014 01:58 PM, Dan Berindei wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> It would also require us to keep a Set<K> for each group, with the keys >>>> associated with that group. As such, I'm not sure it would be a lot >>>> easier to implement (correctly) than FineGrainedAtomicMap. >>>> >>>> >>> >>> Dan, I didn't understand why do we need to keep a Set<K>. Can you >>> elaborate? >> >> >> We'd need some way to keep track of the keys that are part of the group, >> iterating over the entire cache for every getGroup() call would be way too >> slow. > > Right, and load all entries from any CacheStore too :-/ IMO, I prefer to iterate over the data container and cache loader when it is needed than keep the Set<K> for each group. I think the memory will thank you

On 01/27/2014 09:52 AM, Sanne Grinovero wrote: > On 27 January 2014 09:38, Pedro Ruivo <pedro(a)infinispan.org&gt; wrote: >> >> >> On 01/27/2014 09:20 AM, Sanne Grinovero wrote: >>> On 23 January 2014 18:03, Dan Berindei <dan.berindei(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: >>>> >>>> On 22 Jan 2014 16:10, "Pedro Ruivo" <pedro(a)infinispan.org&gt; wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 01/22/2014 01:58 PM, Dan Berindei wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> It would also require us to keep a Set<K> for each group, with the keys >>>>>> associated with that group. As such, I'm not sure it would be a lot >>>>>> easier to implement (correctly) than FineGrainedAtomicMap. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Dan, I didn't understand why do we need to keep a Set<K>. Can you >>>>> elaborate? >>>> >>>> >>>> We'd need some way to keep track of the keys that are part of the group, >>>> iterating over the entire cache for every getGroup() call would be way too >>>> slow. >>> >>> Right, and load all entries from any CacheStore too :-/ >> >> IMO, I prefer to iterate over the data container and cache loader when >> it is needed than keep the Set<K> for each group. I think the memory >> will thank you > > Of course. I'm just highlighting how importand Dan's comment is, > because we obviously don' t want to load everything from CacheStore. > So, tracking which entries are part of the group is essential: > failing this, I'm still skeptical about why the Grouping API is a > better replacement than FGAM. I have one reason: FGAM does not work inside transactions... > > Sanne > _______________________________________________ > 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

On 01/27/2014 12:26 PM, Emmanuel Bernard wrote: > I'd be curious to see performance tests on Pedro's approach (ie walk > through the entire data key set to find the matching elements of a given > group). That might be fast enough but that looks quite scary compared to > a single lookup. I would prefer to have a performance hit than a map of sets (group name => set of keys). I also think that keep this map synchronized with the keys in data container will not be easy...

> > Any doc explaining how FGAM is broken in transactions for curiosity. > well, the map is not isolated, so you can see the updates from other transactions immediately (https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-3932)

It also does not work when you enable write skew check with optimistic transactions (we have a JIRA somewhere)

> On Mon 2014-01-27 11:54, Pedro Ruivo wrote: >> >> >> On 01/27/2014 09:52 AM, Sanne Grinovero wrote: >>> On 27 January 2014 09:38, Pedro Ruivo <pedro(a)infinispan.org&gt; wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> On 01/27/2014 09:20 AM, Sanne Grinovero wrote: >>>>> On 23 January 2014 18:03, Dan Berindei <dan.berindei(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> On 22 Jan 2014 16:10, "Pedro Ruivo" <pedro(a)infinispan.org&gt; wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On 01/22/2014 01:58 PM, Dan Berindei wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> It would also require us to keep a Set<K> for each group, with the keys >>>>>>>> associated with that group. As such, I'm not sure it would be a lot >>>>>>>> easier to implement (correctly) than FineGrainedAtomicMap. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Dan, I didn't understand why do we need to keep a Set<K>. Can you >>>>>>> elaborate? >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> We'd need some way to keep track of the keys that are part of the group, >>>>>> iterating over the entire cache for every getGroup() call would be way too >>>>>> slow. >>>>> >>>>> Right, and load all entries from any CacheStore too :-/ >>>> >>>> IMO, I prefer to iterate over the data container and cache loader when >>>> it is needed than keep the Set<K> for each group. I think the memory >>>> will thank you >>> >>> Of course. I'm just highlighting how importand Dan's comment is, >>> because we obviously don' t want to load everything from CacheStore. >>> So, tracking which entries are part of the group is essential: >>> failing this, I'm still skeptical about why the Grouping API is a >>> better replacement than FGAM. >> >> I have one reason: FGAM does not work inside transactions... >> >>> >>> Sanne >>> _______________________________________________ >>> 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 > _______________________________________________ > 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

On 01/27/2014 01:38 PM, Dan Berindei wrote: > > > > On Mon, Jan 27, 2014 at 2:43 PM, Pedro Ruivo <pedro(a)infinispan.org > <mailto:pedro@infinispan.org>> wrote: > > > > On 01/27/2014 12:26 PM, Emmanuel Bernard wrote: >> I'd be curious to see performance tests on Pedro's approach (ie walk >> through the entire data key set to find the matching elements of > a given >> group). That might be fast enough but that looks quite scary > compared to >> a single lookup. > > I would prefer to have a performance hit than a map of sets (group name > => set of keys). I also think that keep this map synchronized with the > keys in data container will not be easy... > > > Sure, I would prefer the simpler implementation as well. But if changing > an application to use groups instead of atomic maps will change the > processing time of a request from 1ms to 1s, I'm pretty sure users will > prefer to keep use the atomic maps :) you don't need to change the application. we can implement the AtomicHashMap interface on top of grouping :D I'm expecting a negative performance impact but not that high. Also, with the current implementation, FGAHM performs a copy for writing... anyway, we should test and see how it goes :)