[JBoss JIRA] (ISPN-3906) Do not place ProtobufValueWrapper instances in the cache
by Pedro Ruivo (JIRA)
[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-3906?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.... ]
Pedro Ruivo updated ISPN-3906:
------------------------------
Fix Version/s: 9.0.0.Alpha1
(was: 8.2.0.Final)
> Do not place ProtobufValueWrapper instances in the cache
> --------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: ISPN-3906
> URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-3906
> Project: Infinispan
> Issue Type: Task
> Components: Embedded Querying
> Affects Versions: 6.0.0.Final
> Reporter: Adrian Nistor
> Assignee: Adrian Nistor
> Fix For: 9.0.0.Alpha1
>
>
> ProtobufValueWrapper is only needed in order to provide a classbridge so we can integrate with Hibernate Search. Still, we should not need to wrap the protobuf encoded byte array put in the cache with this class. It should only be created as a temporary wrapper just before we feed the data to Hibernate Search.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.11#64026)
10 years, 1 month
[JBoss JIRA] (ISPN-3905) Murmurhash3 implementation is slow on String keys
by Pedro Ruivo (JIRA)
[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-3905?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.... ]
Pedro Ruivo updated ISPN-3905:
------------------------------
Fix Version/s: 9.0.0.Alpha1
(was: 8.2.0.Final)
> Murmurhash3 implementation is slow on String keys
> -------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: ISPN-3905
> URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-3905
> Project: Infinispan
> Issue Type: Enhancement
> Components: Core
> Affects Versions: 6.0.0.Final, 6.0.1.Final
> Reporter: Sanne Grinovero
> Assignee: Dan Berindei
> Priority: Minor
> Fix For: 9.0.0.Alpha1
>
>
> String instances are a common choice for being used as key entries, still the getBytes() operation being performed allocates costly buffers, and the computation to get those bytes looks like expensive too.
> I suspect there might be good reasons for not using the String's own hashcode directly as an input to Murmurhash? Still that's what other implementations seem to do.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.11#64026)
10 years, 1 month
[JBoss JIRA] (ISPN-3835) Index Update command is processed before the registry listener is triggered
by Pedro Ruivo (JIRA)
[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-3835?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.... ]
Pedro Ruivo updated ISPN-3835:
------------------------------
Fix Version/s: 9.0.0.Alpha1
(was: 8.2.0.Final)
> Index Update command is processed before the registry listener is triggered
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: ISPN-3835
> URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-3835
> Project: Infinispan
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: Embedded Querying
> Affects Versions: 6.0.0.Final
> Reporter: Sanne Grinovero
> Assignee: Gustavo Fernandes
> Priority: Critical
> Labels: 64QueryBlockers
> Fix For: 9.0.0.Alpha1
>
>
> When using the InfinispanIndexManager backend the master node might receive an index update command about an index which it hasn't defined yet.
> Index definitions are triggered by the type registry, which in turn is driven by the ClusterRegistry and an event listener on the ClusterRegistry. It looks like slaves are sending update requests before the master has processed the configuration event.
> This leads to index update commands to be lost (with a stacktrace logged)
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.11#64026)
10 years, 1 month
[JBoss JIRA] (ISPN-4722) CLI remove is not cluster-wide
by Pedro Ruivo (JIRA)
[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-4722?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.... ]
Pedro Ruivo updated ISPN-4722:
------------------------------
Fix Version/s: 9.0.0.Alpha1
(was: 8.2.0.Final)
> CLI remove is not cluster-wide
> ------------------------------
>
> Key: ISPN-4722
> URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-4722
> Project: Infinispan
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: CLI
> Affects Versions: 6.0.2.Final, 7.0.0.Beta1
> Reporter: Galder Zamarreño
> Assignee: Tristan Tarrant
> Fix For: 9.0.0.Alpha1
>
>
> In CLI, the "remove" command does not delete entries in all nodes of a clustered environment, only the local copy. However, the "put" command does write in all nodes. Is it the expected behavior? See example below:
> {code}
> node 1
> put k1 v1
> get k1 -> v1
> node 2
> get k1 -> v1
> node 1
> remove k1
> get k1 -> null
> node 2
> get k1 -> v1
> {code}
> I know that these commands provided by CLI are not used in real world, but they are useful to demonstrate the correct configuration of a JDG cluster.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.11#64026)
10 years, 1 month
[JBoss JIRA] (ISPN-4340) Automatically setup shared indexes when indexing is enabled
by Pedro Ruivo (JIRA)
[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-4340?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.... ]
Pedro Ruivo updated ISPN-4340:
------------------------------
Fix Version/s: 9.0.0.Alpha1
(was: 8.2.0.Final)
> 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: 9.0.0.Alpha1
>
>
> - 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
(v6.4.11#64026)
10 years, 1 month