March 2015 - infinispan-issues - Jboss List Archives

[JBoss JIRA] (ISPN-3918) Inconsistent view of the cache with putIfAbsent in a non-tx cache during state transfer

by Galder Zamarreño (JIRA)

[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-3918?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.... ] Galder Zamarreño updated ISPN-3918: ----------------------------------- Fix Version/s: 7.2.0.CR1 (was: 7.2.0.Beta2) > Inconsistent view of the cache with putIfAbsent in a non-tx cache during state transfer > --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Key: ISPN-3918 > URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-3918 > Project: Infinispan > Issue Type: Bug > Components: Core, State Transfer > Affects Versions: 6.0.0.Final > Reporter: Dan Berindei > Fix For: 7.2.0.CR1 > > Attachments: ntpiadjst.log.gz > > > In a non-tx cache, sometimes it's possible for a {{get(k)}} to return {{null}} even though a previous {{putIfAbsent(k, v)}} returned a non-null value and the only concurrent operations on the cache are concurrent putIfAbsent calls. > Say \[B, A, C] are the owners of k (C just joined) > 1. A starts a {{putIfAbsent(k, v1)}} command, sends it to B > 2. B forwards the command to A and C > 3. C writes {{k=v1}} > 4. C becomes the primary owner of k (owners are now \[C, A]) > 5. A/B see the new topology before committing and throw an outdatedTopologyException > 6. A retries the command, sends it to C > 7. C forwards the command to A, which writes {{k=v1}} > 8. C doesn't have to update the entry, returns null > If, between steps 3 and 7, another thread on A starts a {{putIfAbsent(k, v2)}} command, the command will fail and return {{v1}} (because the primary owner already has a value). However, a subsequent {{get(k)}} command will return {{null}}, because A is an owner and doesn't have the value. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.3.11#6341)

9 years, 9 months

1
0
0 / 0

[JBoss JIRA] (ISPN-4140) Clear command doesn't acquire any remote locks in pessimistic mode

by Galder Zamarreño (JIRA)

[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-4140?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.... ] Galder Zamarreño updated ISPN-4140: ----------------------------------- Fix Version/s: 7.2.0.CR1 (was: 7.2.0.Beta2) > Clear command doesn't acquire any remote locks in pessimistic mode > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Key: ISPN-4140 > URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-4140 > Project: Infinispan > Issue Type: Bug > Components: Core > Affects Versions: 6.0.2.Final > Reporter: Dan Berindei > Assignee: Pedro Ruivo > Fix For: 7.2.0.CR1 > > > This is related to ISPN-2530. The 1-phase prepare command is now sent remotely, but it doesn't acquire any locks. The clear command doesn't trigger any remote LockControlCommands either. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.3.11#6341)

9 years, 9 months

1
0
0 / 0

[JBoss JIRA] (ISPN-3985) In BCHM traverse internal segments for parallel map/reduce execution

by Galder Zamarreño (JIRA)

[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-3985?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.... ] Galder Zamarreño updated ISPN-3985: ----------------------------------- Fix Version/s: 7.2.0.CR1 (was: 7.2.0.Beta2) > In BCHM traverse internal segments for parallel map/reduce execution > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Key: ISPN-3985 > URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-3985 > Project: Infinispan > Issue Type: Enhancement > Components: Core > Affects Versions: 7.0.0.Final > Reporter: Vladimir Blagojevic > Fix For: 7.2.0.CR1 > > > Currently when BoundedConcurrentHashMap is used in DataContainer we split input keys and traverse key/value pairs in parallel using executor. That is all good, however, we should optimize this solution as each segment in BCHM is a separate map we can iterate over each segment in a separate thread rather than blindly splitting input keys. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.3.11#6341)

9 years, 9 months

1
0
0 / 0

[JBoss JIRA] (ISPN-3938) AdvancedAsyncCacheLoader.process() concurrency issues

by Galder Zamarreño (JIRA)

[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-3938?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.... ] Galder Zamarreño updated ISPN-3938: ----------------------------------- Fix Version/s: 7.2.0.CR1 (was: 7.2.0.Beta2) > AdvancedAsyncCacheLoader.process() concurrency issues > ----------------------------------------------------- > > Key: ISPN-3938 > URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-3938 > Project: Infinispan > Issue Type: Bug > Components: Core, Loaders and Stores > Affects Versions: 6.0.0.Final > Reporter: Dan Berindei > Assignee: William Burns > Fix For: 7.2.0.CR1 > > > {{AdvancedAsyncCacheLoader.process()}} calls {{advancedLoader().process()}} to collect all the keys in the store, but the HashSet used to collect the keys it not thread-safe. This can cause problems, e.g. during state transfer: > {noformat} > WARN cheTopologyControlCommand | ISPN000071: Caught exception when handling command CacheTopologyControlCommand{cache=sessions, type=CH_UPDATE, sender=alfie-lt-46127, joinInfo=null, topologyId=3, currentCH=DefaultConsistentHash{numSegments=60, numOwners=1, members=[alfie-lt-46127]}, pendingCH=null, throwable=null, viewId=1}java.util.ConcurrentModificationException > at java.util.HashMap$HashIterator.nextEntry(HashMap.java:926) > at java.util.HashMap$KeyIterator.next(HashMap.java:960) > at org.infinispan.persistence.async.AdvancedAsyncCacheLoader.process(AdvancedAsyncCacheLoader.java:80) > at org.infinispan.persistence.manager.PersistenceManagerImpl.processOnAllStores(PersistenceManagerImpl.java:414) > at org.infinispan.statetransfer.StateConsumerImpl.invalidateSegments(StateConsumerImpl.java:910) > at org.infinispan.statetransfer.StateConsumerImpl.onTopologyUpdate(StateConsumerImpl.java:393) > at org.infinispan.statetransfer.StateTransferManagerImpl.doTopologyUpdate(StateTransferManagerImpl.java:178) > at org.infinispan.statetransfer.StateTransferManagerImpl.access$000(StateTransferManagerImpl.java:38) > at org.infinispan.statetransfer.StateTransferManagerImpl$1.updateConsistentHash(StateTransferManagerImpl.java:100) > at org.infinispan.topology.LocalTopologyManagerImpl.handleConsistentHashUpdate(LocalTopologyManagerImpl.java:191) > at org.infinispan.topology.CacheTopologyControlCommand.doPerform(CacheTopologyControlCommand.java:152) > at org.infinispan.topology.CacheTopologyControlCommand.perform(CacheTopologyControlCommand.java:124) > at org.infinispan.topology.ClusterTopologyManagerImpl$3.run(ClusterTopologyManagerImpl.java:606) > at java.util.concurrent.Executors$RunnableAdapter.call(Executors.java:471) > at java.util.concurrent.FutureTask.run(FutureTask.java:262) > at java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor.runWorker(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:1145) > at java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker.run(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:615) > at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:744) > {noformat} -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.3.11#6341)

9 years, 9 months

1
0
0 / 0

[JBoss JIRA] (ISPN-4159) DefaultTwoWayKey2StringMapper encodes objects to strings in a manner that is incompatible with string handling of some databases

by Galder Zamarreño (JIRA)

[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-4159?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.... ] Galder Zamarreño updated ISPN-4159: ----------------------------------- Fix Version/s: 7.2.0.CR1 (was: 7.2.0.Beta2) > DefaultTwoWayKey2StringMapper encodes objects to strings in a manner that is incompatible with string handling of some databases > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Key: ISPN-4159 > URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-4159 > Project: Infinispan > Issue Type: Bug > Components: Loaders and Stores > Affects Versions: 6.0.0.Final > Reporter: Adrian Nistor > Assignee: Adrian Nistor > Fix For: 7.2.0.CR1 > > > DefaultTwoWayKey2StringMapper uses two neat tricks. > 1. it does not encode all supported types, it only encodes non-Strings. Strings are kept unmodified. > 2. it uses a special prefix (unicode char 0xfeff) to mark which strings were encoded and which are plain. > Unfortunately some databases, notably MySql, interpret the endianness mark (0xfeff, 0xfffe), convert to native byte order and then drop it. > This leaves us with no clue the string is not an actual String but an encoded representation of another type. This misinterpretation leads later to ClassCastExceptions in various places in core and user code. > Proposed fix: get rid of #1 and #2 optimisations. Encode all objects, including Strings and always use the ?n prefix (where n stands for the original type). Drop the 0xFEFF marker prefix. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.3.11#6341)

9 years, 9 months

1
0
0 / 0

[JBoss JIRA] (ISPN-4286) Two concurrent putIfAbsent operations can both return null during rebalance

by Galder Zamarreño (JIRA)

[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-4286?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.... ] Galder Zamarreño updated ISPN-4286: ----------------------------------- Fix Version/s: 7.2.0.CR1 (was: 7.2.0.Beta2) > Two concurrent putIfAbsent operations can both return null during rebalance > --------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Key: ISPN-4286 > URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-4286 > Project: Infinispan > Issue Type: Bug > Components: Core, State Transfer > Affects Versions: 6.0.2.Final > Reporter: Dan Berindei > Assignee: Dan Berindei > Priority: Critical > Fix For: 7.2.0.CR1 > > > If the cache topology changes while executing a putIfAbsent operation, the old primary owner will throw an OutdatedTopologyException, and the originator will retry on the new owner. > When retrying the PutKeyValueCommand on the new primary owner, we compare the current value with the command's new value. If they are equal, we assume that the initial command wrote the old value, and we return {{null}}. > However, the value might have been written by another putIfAbsent operation. So we could have two {{putIfAbsent(k, v)}} operations, both returning {{null}}. > {code} > A is the originator, B is the primary owner, k = null > A -> B: putIfAbsent(k, v1) > B dies before writing v, C is now primary owner > D -> C: putIfAbsent(k, v1) // another put operation from D, with the same value > C -> D: null // correct > A -> C: retry_putIfAbsent(k, v1) > C -> A: null // C assumes A is overwriting its own value, so it's also returning null > {code} -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.3.11#6341)

9 years, 9 months

1
0
0 / 0

[JBoss JIRA] (ISPN-4167) DummyBaseTransactionManager doesn't clean up when rollback fails

by Galder Zamarreño (JIRA)

[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-4167?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.... ] Galder Zamarreño updated ISPN-4167: ----------------------------------- Fix Version/s: 7.2.0.CR1 (was: 7.2.0.Beta2) > DummyBaseTransactionManager doesn't clean up when rollback fails > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > > Key: ISPN-4167 > URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-4167 > Project: Infinispan > Issue Type: Bug > Components: Core > Affects Versions: 6.0.2.Final > Reporter: Dan Berindei > Assignee: Pedro Ruivo > Fix For: 7.2.0.CR1 > > > If the rollback fails, the thread local holding the current transaction is not cleared, and it becomes impossible to start a new transaction on the same thread. > One way this can happen is when Infinispan registers as a XA transaction, but DummyTransactionManager is not configured to use XA Xids: > {noformat} > 12:47:57,169 ERROR (testng-ReplicationExceptionTest:) [DummyTransaction] ISPN000098: Exception while rollback > java.lang.UnsupportedOperationException > at org.infinispan.transaction.tm.DummyNoXaXid.getBranchQualifier(DummyNoXaXid.java:30) > at org.infinispan.transaction.xa.recovery.SerializableXid.<init>(SerializableXid.java:37) > at org.infinispan.transaction.xa.TransactionXaAdapter.convertXid(TransactionXaAdapter.java:251) > at org.infinispan.transaction.xa.TransactionXaAdapter.rollback(TransactionXaAdapter.java:122) > at org.infinispan.transaction.tm.DummyTransaction.runRollback(DummyTransaction.java:281) > at org.infinispan.transaction.tm.DummyTransaction.rollback(DummyTransaction.java:88) > at org.infinispan.transaction.tm.DummyBaseTransactionManager.rollback(DummyBaseTransactionManager.java:104) > at org.infinispan.CacheImpl.tryRollback(CacheImpl.java:1442) > at org.infinispan.CacheImpl.executeCommandAndCommitIfNeeded(CacheImpl.java:1418) > at org.infinispan.CacheImpl.putInternal(CacheImpl.java:894) > at org.infinispan.CacheImpl.put(CacheImpl.java:886) > at org.infinispan.CacheImpl.put(CacheImpl.java:1461) > at org.infinispan.CacheImpl.put(CacheImpl.java:225) > at org.infinispan.tx.synchronisation.ReplicationExceptionTest.testSyncReplTimeout(ReplicationExceptionTest.java:54) > {noformat} -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.3.11#6341)

9 years, 9 months

1
0
0 / 0

[JBoss JIRA] (ISPN-4340) Automatically setup shared indexes when indexing is enabled

by Galder Zamarreño (JIRA)

[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-4340?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.... ] Galder Zamarreño updated ISPN-4340: ----------------------------------- Fix Version/s: 7.2.0.CR1 (was: 7.2.0.Beta2) > Automatically setup shared indexes when indexing is enabled > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > Key: ISPN-4340 > URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-4340 > Project: Infinispan > Issue Type: Feature Request > Components: Embedded Querying > Reporter: Sanne Grinovero > Assignee: Gustavo Fernandes > Labels: 64QueryBlockers > Fix For: 7.2.0.CR1 > > > - on replicated Caches, we should create a default index on a FSDirectory and provide some appropriate default tuning, for example enabling NRT. > - distributed Caches will need the Infinispan Directory (shared) and a master/slave backend (Infinispan IndexManager, while NRT is not compatible in this case) > We want to keep the properties configuration structure as well as an "advanced tuning" and override capabilities of the default choices. > Some more common options like sync/async indexing should probably be promoted to be controlled by the XML elements and configuration DSL excplicitly. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.3.11#6341)

9 years, 9 months

1
0
0 / 0

[JBoss JIRA] (ISPN-4442) Package remoting jars for the embedded cli client

by Galder Zamarreño (JIRA)

[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-4442?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.... ] Galder Zamarreño updated ISPN-4442: ----------------------------------- Fix Version/s: 7.2.0.CR1 (was: 7.2.0.Beta2) > Package remoting jars for the embedded cli client > ------------------------------------------------- > > Key: ISPN-4442 > URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-4442 > Project: Infinispan > Issue Type: Bug > Components: CLI > Reporter: Tristan Tarrant > Assignee: Tristan Tarrant > Fix For: 7.2.0.CR1 > > -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.3.11#6341)

9 years, 9 months

1
0
0 / 0

[JBoss JIRA] (ISPN-4546) Possible stale lock when the primary owner leaves during rebalance

by Galder Zamarreño (JIRA)

[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-4546?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.... ] Galder Zamarreño updated ISPN-4546: ----------------------------------- Fix Version/s: 7.2.0.CR1 (was: 7.2.0.Beta2) > Possible stale lock when the primary owner leaves during rebalance > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Key: ISPN-4546 > URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-4546 > Project: Infinispan > Issue Type: Bug > Components: Core, State Transfer > Affects Versions: 7.0.0.Alpha5 > Reporter: Dan Berindei > Assignee: Dan Berindei > Priority: Critical > Fix For: 7.2.0.CR1 > > > Topology T: coordinator = A, owners(k) = [C, D], pending_owners(k) = null > B sends prepareCommand(tx1, put(k, v)) to C, D > D adds backup locks and replies > C acquires lock, ready to send reply to B > A starts installing topology T+1: owners(k) = [C, D], pending_owners(k) = [C, E] > A, C and E install topology T+1, B and D do not > E requests and receives tx data from C, including tx1 > C leaves > B sees a SuspectException, sends rollbackCommand(tx1) to C, D > D removes tx1 > C has left, but is ignored > B reports to the user that the tx has been rolled back > B and D install topology T+1 (optional) > A starts installing topology T+2: owners(k) = [D], pending_owners(k) = [E] > A, B, D, E all install topology T+2 > E requests and receives state from D, but it does not remove tx1 > A starts installing topology T+3: owners(k) = [E], pending_owners(k) = null > E now has a stale backup lock on k > It seems very hard to reproduce in production: C would have to leave soon enough so that B and D haven't received the T+1 topology yet, but late enough for it to send its transaction data to E. > A possible solution would be to catch any SuspectException during prepare/commit/rollback (without ignoring leavers), wait for a new topology, and replicate the command again on the new owners. Obviously, this wouldn't work with asynchronous prepare/commit/rollback. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.3.11#6341)

9 years, 9 months

1
0
0 / 0

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

infinispan-issues March 2015