[JBoss JIRA] Created: (ISPN-256) Enable Infinispan SPIs to implement their own commands
by Galder Zamarreno (JIRA)
Enable Infinispan SPIs to implement their own commands
------------------------------------------------------
Key: ISPN-256
URL: https://jira.jboss.org/jira/browse/ISPN-256
Project: Infinispan
Issue Type: Feature Request
Reporter: Galder Zamarreno
Assignee: Galder Zamarreno
Fix For: 4.1.0.BETA1
Much nicer IMHO would be a nice SPI / plug point to allow applications to extend the set of commands. Let an app create an ExtensionCommand; if that comes in off the channel pass it off to the handler the application registered.
This could for example be used instead of the solution currently used in http://opensource.atlassian.com/projects/hibernate/browse/HHH-3818. In HHH-3818, the cache is used as a notification vehicle which is a bit of a hack and has some limitations for example when trying to implement a similar solution for evict(key) op.
Another use case for it would be HTTP session ownership, from Brian Stansberry:
(09:32:09 AM) brian_stansberry: ... it's just that only 1 server at a time s/b able to use a session
(09:32:25 AM) brian_stansberry: so on failover i send an extension command requesting ownership
(09:33:19 AM) brian_stansberry: there's actually a servlet spec requirement that only one server at a time access a session
(09:33:23 AM) brian_stansberry: ejb spec too
(09:33:37 AM) brian_stansberry: we don't properly handle that
...
(09:34:18 AM) brian_stansberry: basically it's a lock
...
(09:34:35 AM) brian_stansberry: that's all it is, a distributed lock
(09:35:03 AM) brian_stansberry: but once you have the distributed lock it's yours until you give it up
(09:35:29 AM) brian_stansberry: so once 1 request acquires it, subsequent requests to same server can just use a local lock
...
(09:41:59 AM) brian_stansberry: the key thing is there should only be a cluster-wide operation once per session
(09:42:11 AM) brian_stansberry: unless there is failover
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators: https://jira.jboss.org/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa
-
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
13 years, 9 months
[JBoss JIRA] Created: (ISPN-272) recover from transaction failures
by Mircea Markus (JIRA)
recover from transaction failures
---------------------------------
Key: ISPN-272
URL: https://jira.jboss.org/jira/browse/ISPN-272
Project: Infinispan
Issue Type: Feature Request
Components: Transactions
Affects Versions: 5.0.0.GA
Reporter: Mircea Markus
Assignee: Manik Surtani
We currently don't support any sort of recovery from transaction failures.
E.g.
tm.start();
database.delete(account);
ispnCache.put(account);
tm.commit():
At tm commit:
-prepare is successful on both enlisted resources.
- database.commit - fails
What shall we do with the locks/state from ispnCache.
Possible solutions:
- configure to automatically commit/rollback after a timeout
- keep locks on resources and allow manual intervention through JMX
- others?
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators: https://jira.jboss.org/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa
-
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
13 years, 9 months
[JBoss JIRA] Created: (ISPN-493) Harden rehash leave process
by Vladimir Blagojevic (JIRA)
Harden rehash leave process
---------------------------
Key: ISPN-493
URL: https://jira.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-493
Project: Infinispan
Issue Type: Task
Affects Versions: 4.1.0.BETA2, 4.0.0.Final
Reporter: Vladimir Blagojevic
Assignee: Vladimir Blagojevic
Fix For: 5.0.0.BETA1, 5.0.0.Final
We need to make sure that leave rehash process properly handles massive and rapid node failure.
Massive failures:
JGroups detects multiple node failures and pushes up to Infinispan views that are more "volatile" than we currently assumed (only one member at the time can leave). For example, if we have view V1={A,B,C,D,E} and massive failure causes {C,D,E} to fail, JGroups failure detection and GMS are going to install a view V2={A,B} to surviving members. LeaveTask does not handle this scenario.
Rapid node failure:
We need to revisit how LeaveTasks are queued up and executed/canceled during rapid node failures. Do we always cancel currently running leave tasks? At what stage are we allowed to cancel it and at what stage of a leave tasks is it better to wait for a completion of a task.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators: https://jira.jboss.org/secure/Administrators.jspa
-
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
13 years, 10 months