[JBoss JIRA] (ISPN-5386) Tx succeeds on coord, while being rollbacked on other participants due to Tx pruning
by Dan Berindei (JIRA)
[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-5386?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.... ]
Dan Berindei updated ISPN-5386:
-------------------------------
Status: Pull Request Sent (was: Coding In Progress)
Git Pull Request: https://github.com/infinispan/infinispan/pull/3419
> Tx succeeds on coord, while being rollbacked on other participants due to Tx pruning
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: ISPN-5386
> URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-5386
> Project: Infinispan
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: Core
> Reporter: Matej Čimbora
> Assignee: Dan Berindei
>
> All participants of transaction share the same topology. TX gets successfully prepared & commited on coordinator.
> {code}
> 03:49:27,759 DEBUG [org.infinispan.remoting.transport.jgroups.JGroupsTransport] (Incoming-1,edg-perf08-48196) New view accepted: [edg-perf08-48196|18] (5) [edg-perf08-48196, edg-perf01-23632, edg-perf02-34805, edg-perf03-16232, edg-perf04-41106]
> 03:49:41,051 TRACE [org.infinispan.statetransfer.StateTransferManagerImpl] (transport-thread-9) Installing new cache topology CacheTopology{id=53, rebalanceId=19, currentCH=DefaultConsistentHash{ns = 512, owners = (5)[edg-perf08-48196: 103+101, edg-perf01-23632: 102+103, edg-perf02-34805: 102+103, edg-perf03-16232: 102+103, edg-perf04-41106: 103+102]}, pendingCH=null, unionCH=null, actualMembers=[edg-perf08-48196, edg-perf01-23632, edg-perf02-34805, edg-perf03-16232, edg-perf04-41106]} on cache testCache
> ...
> 03:51:34,005 TRACE [org.infinispan.remoting.rpc.RpcManagerImpl] (DefaultStressor-1) edg-perf08-48196 invoking PrepareCommand { ... gtx=GlobalTransaction:<edg-perf08-48196>:13330:local, cacheName='testCache', topologyId=53} to recipient list [edg-perf03-16232, edg-perf08-48196, edg-perf02-34805, edg-perf04-41106, edg-perf01-23632]
> 03:51:36,329 TRACE [org.infinispan.remoting.transport.jgroups.CommandAwareRpcDispatcher] (DefaultStressor-1) Responses: [sender=edg-perf03-16232,received=true, suspected=false] [sender=edg-perf02-34805, received=true, suspected=false] [sender=edg-perf04-41106, received=true, suspected=false] [sender=edg-perf01-23632, received=true, suspected=false]
> 03:51:36,342 TRACE [org.infinispan.remoting.rpc.RpcManagerImpl] (DefaultStressor-1) edg-perf08-48196 invoking CommitCommand {gtx=GlobalTransaction:<edg-perf08-48196>:13330:local, cacheName='testCache', topologyId=53} to recipient list [edg-perf03-16232, edg-perf08-48196, edg-perf02-34805, edg-perf04-41106, edg-perf01-23632] with options RpcOptions{timeout=60000, unit=MILLISECONDS, fifoOrder=false, totalOrder=false, responseFilter=null, responseMode=SYNCHRONOUS_IGNORE_LEAVERS, skipReplicationQueue=false}
> 03:51:36,703 TRACE [org.infinispan.remoting.transport.jgroups.CommandAwareRpcDispatcher] (DefaultStressor-1) Responses: [sender=edg-perf03-16232, retval=SuccessfulResponse{responseValue=null} , received=true, suspected=false] [sender=edg-perf02-34805, retval=SuccessfulResponse{responseValue=null} , received=true, suspected=false] [sender=edg-perf04-41106, retval=SuccessfulResponse{responseValue=null} , received=true, suspected=false] [sender=edg-perf01-23632, retval=SuccessfulResponse{responseValue=null} , received=true, suspected=false]
> {code}
> The problem is, that other participating nodes rollback it, as TX with higher id was completed before. Successfull response is returned for both prepare & commit commands.
> {code}
> 03:49:58,190 TRACE [org.infinispan.transaction.TransactionTable] (remote-thread-499) Marking transaction GlobalTransaction:<edg-perf08-48196>:13337:local as completed
> ...
> 03:51:34,122 TRACE [org.infinispan.transaction.TransactionTable] (remote-thread-593) Created and registered remote transaction RemoteTransaction{ ... lookedUpEntries={}, lockedKeys=null, backupKeyLocks=null, lookedUpEntriesTopology=2147483647, isMarkedForRollback=false, tx=GlobalTransaction:<edg-perf08-48196>:13330:remote, state=null}
> 03:51:34,073 TRACE [org.infinispan.remoting.InboundInvocationHandlerImpl] (remote-thread-593) Calling perform() on PrepareCommand { ... gtx=GlobalTransaction:<edg-perf08-48196>:13330:remote, cacheName='testCache', topologyId=53}
> 03:51:34,342 TRACE [org.infinispan.interceptors.TxInterceptor] (remote-thread-593) Rolling back remote transaction GlobalTransaction:<edg-perf08-48196>:13330:remote because either already completed (true) or originator no longer in the cluster (false).
> 03:51:34,639 TRACE [org.infinispan.remoting.InboundInvocationHandlerImpl] (remote-thread-593) About to send back response null for command PrepareCommand { ... gtx=GlobalTransaction:<edg-perf08-48196>:13330:remote, cacheName='testCache', topologyId=53}
> 03:51:36,355 TRACE [org.infinispan.remoting.InboundInvocationHandlerImpl] (remote-thread-589) Calling perform() on CommitCommand {gtx=GlobalTransaction:<edg-perf08-48196>:13330:remote, cacheName='testCache', topologyId=53}
> 03:51:36,355 TRACE [org.infinispan.commands.tx.AbstractTransactionBoundaryCommand] (remote-thread-589) Did not find a RemoteTransaction for GlobalTransaction:<edg-perf08-48196>:13330:remote
> 03:51:36,355 TRACE [org.infinispan.remoting.InboundInvocationHandlerImpl] (remote-thread-589) About to send back response SuccessfulResponse{responseValue=null} for command CommitCommand {gtx=GlobalTransaction:<edg-perf08-48196>:13330:remote, cacheName='testCache', topologyId=53}
> {code}
> Exception response should be returned instead to avoid incorrect assumptions about presence of updated entry in the cache.
> [~dan.berindei] spotted lastPrunedTxId modifications are not logged, let's make sure they are.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)
9 years, 1 month
[JBoss JIRA] (ISPN-5268) Backup segments may not be removed after failed state transfer
by Dan Berindei (JIRA)
[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-5268?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.... ]
Dan Berindei resolved ISPN-5268.
--------------------------------
Fix Version/s: 7.0.0.Final
Resolution: Done
This IllegalArgumentException was breaking the topology update handling:
{noformat}
2014/07/31:11:16:11,110 WARN [org.infinispan.topology.CacheTopologyControlCommand] (remote-thread-931) ISPN000071: Caught exception when handling command CacheTopologyControlCommand{cache=cache, type=CH_UPDATE, sender=node01, joinInfo=null, topologyId=61, currentCH=DefaultConsistentHash{numSegments=240, numOwners=2, members=[...]}, pendingCH=null, throwable=null, viewId=32}: java.lang.IllegalArgumentException: Node node04 is not a member
at org.infinispan.distribution.ch.DefaultConsistentHash.getSegmentsForOwner(DefaultConsistentHash.java:87) [infinispan-core-6.1.0.Final-redhat-4.jar:6.1.0.Final-redhat-4]
at org.infinispan.statetransfer.StateConsumerImpl.onTopologyUpdate(StateConsumerImpl.java:457) [infinispan-core-6.1.0.Final-redhat-4.jar:6.1.0.Final-redhat-4]
at org.infinispan.statetransfer.StateTransferManagerImpl.doTopologyUpdate(StateTransferManagerImpl.java:199) [infinispan-core-6.1.0.Final-redhat-4.jar:6.1.0.Final-redhat-4]
at org.infinispan.statetransfer.StateTransferManagerImpl.access$000(StateTransferManagerImpl.java:39) [infinispan-core-6.1.0.Final-redhat-4.jar:6.1.0.Final-redhat-4]
at org.infinispan.statetransfer.StateTransferManagerImpl$1.updateConsistentHash(StateTransferManagerImpl.java:104) [infinispan-core-6.1.0.Final-redhat-4.jar:6.1.0.Final-redhat-4]
at org.infinispan.topology.LocalTopologyManagerImpl.handleConsistentHashUpdate(LocalTopologyManagerImpl.java:201) [infinispan-core-6.1.0.Final-redhat-4.jar:6.1.0.Final-redhat-4]
at org.infinispan.topology.CacheTopologyControlCommand.doPerform(CacheTopologyControlCommand.java:152) [infinispan-core-6.1.0.Final-redhat-4.jar:6.1.0.Final-redhat-4]
at org.infinispan.topology.CacheTopologyControlCommand.perform(CacheTopologyControlCommand.java:124) [infinispan-core-6.1.0.Final-redhat-4.jar:6.1.0.Final-redhat-4]
at org.infinispan.remoting.transport.jgroups.CommandAwareRpcDispatcher$4.run(CommandAwareRpcDispatcher.java:270) [infinispan-core-6.1.0.Final-redhat-4.jar:6.1.0.Final-redhat-4]
at java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor.runWorker(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:1145) [rt.jar:1.7.0_65]
at java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker.run(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:615) [rt.jar:1.7.0_65]
at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:745) [rt.jar:1.7.0_65]
{noformat}
The exception appears because the node had a previous consistent hash, but it was not a member of it (perhaps after a merge). The ISPN-4852 fix avoids the IllegalArgumentException by replacing the direct call to DefaultConsistentHash.getSegmentsForOwner() with a call to getOwnedSegments().
> Backup segments may not be removed after failed state transfer
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: ISPN-5268
> URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-5268
> Project: Infinispan
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: Core
> Reporter: Tristan Tarrant
> Assignee: Dan Berindei
> Fix For: 7.0.0.Final
>
>
> Dist cache can lost data if the primary and all backups are lost at the same time. To detect such data loss, they are monitoring the tatal sum of entries from all nodes using JMX. If the sum reduces by a considerable ammount, data loss (by lost a segment) is concluded. But they found a case that the sum increases, not decreases, after failed state transfer. This is probably caused by an extra backup segment that hasn't been cleaned up when the last state transfer failed.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)
9 years, 1 month
[JBoss JIRA] (ISPN-5409) Primitive values lead to failure with remote non-indexed query
by Adrian Nistor (JIRA)
Adrian Nistor created ISPN-5409:
-----------------------------------
Summary: Primitive values lead to failure with remote non-indexed query
Key: ISPN-5409
URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-5409
Project: Infinispan
Issue Type: Bug
Components: Remote Querying
Reporter: Adrian Nistor
Assignee: Adrian Nistor
Querying of primitive values is not currently supported (see ISPN-3949).
Indexed query will successfully ignore them but with non-indexed query we get failures. This scenario should be gracefully handled by non-indexed query too.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)
9 years, 1 month