[JBoss JIRA] (ISPN-4286) Two concurrent putIfAbsent operations can both return null during rebalance
by Tristan Tarrant (Jira)
[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-4286?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.... ]
Tristan Tarrant updated ISPN-4286:
----------------------------------
Fix Version/s: 10.0.1.Final
(was: 10.0.0.Final)
> 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
> Labels: consistency
> Fix For: 10.0.1.Final
>
>
> 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
(v7.13.8#713008)
6 years, 5 months
[JBoss JIRA] (ISPN-5077) Custom remote events can be slightly inefficient
by Tristan Tarrant (Jira)
[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-5077?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.... ]
Tristan Tarrant updated ISPN-5077:
----------------------------------
Fix Version/s: 10.0.1.Final
(was: 10.0.0.Final)
> Custom remote events can be slightly inefficient
> ------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: ISPN-5077
> URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-5077
> Project: Infinispan
> Issue Type: Enhancement
> Components: Remote Protocols
> Affects Versions: 7.0.2.Final
> Reporter: Galder Zamarreño
> Priority: Major
> Fix For: 10.0.1.Final
>
>
> Something we might want to improve for Hot Rod 3.0 protocol:
> [16:40] <galderz> i've been thinking further about converters, and I think i've found a slight mismatch between what converter means for embedded listeners vs remote listeners
> [16:40] <wburns> oh yeah?
> [16:40] <galderz> for embedded listeners, it essentially transforms what you see as `value`
> [16:41] <galderz> with the knowledge that key and metadata information will be shipped
> [16:41] <galderz> the way i mapped converter to remote listeners is that whatever the converter returns, we ship that, as is, to the client
> [16:41] <galderz> so, if a remote listener wants a custom event that includes key + value
> [16:41] <galderz> it needs to develop a converter impl that returns bytes containing key + value
> [16:41] <galderz> which is inefficient because you are passing around the key twice
> [16:42] <galderz> once as part of the event itself, and again inside the converted value
> [16:42] <galderz> inefficient from the POV of shipping stuff around from other nodes to where the cluster listener is located
> [16:44] <wburns> yeah makes sense
> [16:44] <galderz> not a major issue but not easy to fix without changing semantics or public protocol
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v7.13.8#713008)
6 years, 5 months
[JBoss JIRA] (ISPN-4817) Cluster Listener replication of listener to remote dist nodes needs privilege action
by Tristan Tarrant (Jira)
[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-4817?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.... ]
Tristan Tarrant updated ISPN-4817:
----------------------------------
Fix Version/s: 10.0.1.Final
(was: 10.0.0.Final)
> Cluster Listener replication of listener to remote dist nodes needs privilege action
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: ISPN-4817
> URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-4817
> Project: Infinispan
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: Loaders and Stores
> Affects Versions: 7.0.0.CR1
> Reporter: Will Burns
> Priority: Critical
> Fix For: 10.0.1.Final
>
>
> The ClusterListenerReplicateCallable needs to add the listener in a privileged block so that it can work properly.
> I was also thinking if we need to change all of our messages to send along the current Subject so it can be properly applied to remote invocations as well. In this case we wouldn't need to wrap the listener invocation.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v7.13.8#713008)
6 years, 5 months
[JBoss JIRA] (ISPN-4624) Allow custom partition handling strategy
by Tristan Tarrant (Jira)
[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-4624?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.... ]
Tristan Tarrant updated ISPN-4624:
----------------------------------
Fix Version/s: 10.0.1.Final
(was: 10.0.0.Final)
> Allow custom partition handling strategy
> ----------------------------------------
>
> Key: ISPN-4624
> URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-4624
> Project: Infinispan
> Issue Type: Feature Request
> Components: Core
> Affects Versions: 7.0.0.Beta1
> Reporter: Dan Berindei
> Priority: Major
> Labels: partition_handling
> Fix For: 10.0.1.Final
>
>
> Users should be able to configure a custom PartitionHandlingStrategy. It should be able to specify a behaviour on merge as well.
> We might want to merge this with the RebalancePolicy, which was also supposed to be configurable.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v7.13.8#713008)
6 years, 5 months
[JBoss JIRA] (ISPN-5415) Expose protobuf entries to scripting
by Tristan Tarrant (Jira)
[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-5415?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.... ]
Tristan Tarrant updated ISPN-5415:
----------------------------------
Fix Version/s: 10.0.1.Final
(was: 10.0.0.Final)
> Expose protobuf entries to scripting
> ------------------------------------
>
> Key: ISPN-5415
> URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-5415
> Project: Infinispan
> Issue Type: Feature Request
> Components: Remote Querying
> Affects Versions: 8.0.0.Final
> Reporter: Nistor Adrian
> Assignee: Nistor Adrian
> Priority: Major
> Fix For: 10.0.1.Final
>
>
> We need an alternative API for Protostream marshalling that is easy to consume from scripting languages. The messages need to be unmarshalled into a map-like object that can be accessed easily from scripting languages. No marshaller implementation code should be provided by users, also no annotations.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v7.13.8#713008)
6 years, 5 months
[JBoss JIRA] (ISPN-5357) Hot Rod protocol .NEXT
by Tristan Tarrant (Jira)
[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-5357?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.... ]
Tristan Tarrant updated ISPN-5357:
----------------------------------
Fix Version/s: 10.0.1.Final
(was: 10.0.0.Final)
> Hot Rod protocol .NEXT
> ----------------------
>
> Key: ISPN-5357
> URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-5357
> Project: Infinispan
> Issue Type: Enhancement
> Reporter: Galder Zamarreño
> Assignee: Galder Zamarreño
> Priority: Major
> Fix For: 10.0.1.Final
>
>
> Infinispan should expose a single endpoint which should behave as follows:
> - by default offer an HTTP/1.1 RESTftul interface
> - through HTTP upgrade allow switching to better protocols
> - support an HTTP/2 RESTful interface
> - support Hot Rod 3.0, which would be a gRPC protocol with additional L2 and L3 intelligence for capable clients
> *UPDATE (6/10/2015)*: Hot Rod 3.0 could become a HTTP REST protocol taking advantage of existing infrastructure to deal with HTTP requests efficiently, and if it was based on HTTP 2.0, we could have binary data inside of it. Performance should be on par. Text mode could be available for debug or demos. This essentially would mean REST and Hot Rod would merge into one.
> A binary protocol rethink is needed to take better advantage of CPUs and buffering. This is based on the ideas of Martin Thompson's Simple Binary Encoding [blog post|http://mechanical-sympathy.blogspot.cz/2014/05/simple-binary-encoding.html]
> In essence, we need to move Hot Rod protocol towards having mostly fixed size fields, hence getting rid of `vInt` and `vLong` formats which although safe some bytes, they hinder long stream reading patterns.
> An optional part here would be whether to consider using SBE directly, but this JIRA should be mostly oriented at making sure we have a protocol that can be read fast and efficiently.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v7.13.8#713008)
6 years, 5 months
[JBoss JIRA] (ISPN-5163) A write operation with the SKIP_LOCKING flag can roll back the transaction
by Tristan Tarrant (Jira)
[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-5163?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.... ]
Tristan Tarrant updated ISPN-5163:
----------------------------------
Fix Version/s: 10.0.1.Final
(was: 10.0.0.Final)
> A write operation with the SKIP_LOCKING flag can roll back the transaction
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: ISPN-5163
> URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-5163
> Project: Infinispan
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: Core
> Affects Versions: 7.0.3.Final, 7.1.0.Beta1
> Reporter: Dan Berindei
> Assignee: Dan Berindei
> Priority: Major
> Fix For: 10.0.1.Final
>
>
> When a write operation has the SKIP_LOCKING flag, it does not send a {{LockControlCommand}} to the primary owner, but it can send a {{ClusteredGetCommand}} with {{acquireRemoteLocks=true}} instead. The {{ClusteredGetCommmand}} will then execute a {{LockControlCommand}} with the origin not set properly, and {{TxInterceptor}} will roll back the transaction because the originator ({{null}}) appears to have left the cluster.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v7.13.8#713008)
6 years, 5 months
[JBoss JIRA] (ISPN-5093) Granularity of remote event listener implementations doing the same job
by Tristan Tarrant (Jira)
[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-5093?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.... ]
Tristan Tarrant updated ISPN-5093:
----------------------------------
Fix Version/s: 10.0.1.Final
(was: 10.0.0.Final)
> Granularity of remote event listener implementations doing the same job
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: ISPN-5093
> URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-5093
> Project: Infinispan
> Issue Type: Enhancement
> Components: Remote Protocols
> Reporter: Galder Zamarreño
> Assignee: Galder Zamarreño
> Priority: Major
> Fix For: 10.0.1.Final
>
>
> Currently, if N clients add the same listener to a cache that does the same job, e.g. keeping a near cache consistent, this results in N server-side cluster listeners created, each potentially installed in different nodes. If one of those nodes fails, all clients that had a listener registered to that node will have to find a different node for this listener.
> The downsides of this approach is that there are as many cluster listeners installed as clients have added listeners (or have near cache enabled), which might not very efficient. If a node goes down, all clients that have cluster listeners there need to failover to some other node.
> The advantage of this approach is simplicity of the approach to decide where to add the listener and where to failover to.
> For this type of scenarios, an alternative set up might be worth exploring:
> If all these client side listeners are interested in exactly the same events, and the client ID would be exposed via the RemoteCache API, a server side cluster listener multi-plexing between all these clients could be potentially built. In other words, instead of having N clients register N cluster listeners, the first client would register the cluster listener with a client listener ID, and if more registrations were added with the same client listener ID, the connections would be added to the existing cluster listener implementation.
> The maximise the efficiency of this solution, all clients (even running in different JMVs), given the same client listener ID, should agree upon the node to add the listener in. For a distributed cache, hashing on the cache name would work. For replicated caches, since there's no hashing available, the first node of the view could be used.
> Since the logic to be executed server-side varies between being the first node adding the client listener vs the others, synchronization would be added to make sure that the first invocation only creates the cluster listener, and the others simply add the channel to the listener.
> Failover is a bit more tricky too, because if the node with the cluster listener goes down, all the clients have to failover, which again exposes a 1st vs the others type of logic.
> Advantages of this approach is the reduction in number of cluster listeners and potentially efficiency coming from a single cluster listener implementation server side.
> The disadvantages come from the server side logic to add/failover a cluster listener, which need to take into account if the listener is present or not. Other disadvantages come from needing the clients to use some specific routing for adding listeners for same node.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v7.13.8#713008)
6 years, 5 months
[JBoss JIRA] (ISPN-5075) org.infinispan.IllegalLifecycleStateException in query tests
by Tristan Tarrant (Jira)
[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-5075?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.... ]
Tristan Tarrant updated ISPN-5075:
----------------------------------
Fix Version/s: 10.0.1.Final
(was: 10.0.0.Final)
> org.infinispan.IllegalLifecycleStateException in query tests
> ------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: ISPN-5075
> URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-5075
> Project: Infinispan
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: Test Suite - Query
> Affects Versions: 7.1.0.Alpha1
> Reporter: Gustavo Fernandes
> Assignee: Gustavo Fernandes
> Priority: Major
> Fix For: 10.0.1.Final
>
>
> Many query tests log an error after running:
> {code}
> Exception in thread "Hibernate Search: async deletion of index segments-1" org.infinispan.IllegalLifecycleStateException: ISPN000323: Cache 'LuceneIndexesMetadata' is in 'TERMINATED' state and so it does not accept new invocations. Either restart it or recreate the cache container.
> at org.infinispan.interceptors.InvocationContextInterceptor.handleAll(InvocationContextInterceptor.java:89)
> at org.infinispan.interceptors.InvocationContextInterceptor.handleDefault(InvocationContextInterceptor.java:71)
> at org.infinispan.commands.AbstractVisitor.visitGetKeyValueCommand(AbstractVisitor.java:77)
> at org.infinispan.commands.read.GetKeyValueCommand.acceptVisitor(GetKeyValueCommand.java:44)
> at org.infinispan.interceptors.InterceptorChain.invoke(InterceptorChain.java:333)
> at org.infinispan.cache.impl.CacheImpl.get(CacheImpl.java:422)
> at org.infinispan.cache.impl.DecoratedCache.get(DecoratedCache.java:427)
> at org.infinispan.lucene.impl.FileListOperations.getFileList(FileListOperations.java:160)
> at org.infinispan.lucene.impl.FileListOperations.deleteFileName(FileListOperations.java:129)
> at org.infinispan.lucene.impl.DirectoryImplementor.deleteFile(DirectoryImplementor.java:64)
> at org.infinispan.lucene.impl.DirectoryLuceneV4$DeleteTask.run(DirectoryLuceneV4.java:195)
> at java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor.runWorker(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:1145)
> at java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker.run(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:615)
> at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:745)
> {code}
> That error does not cause the tests to fail, and are due to the async deletes of segments recently implemented. Need to check if the executors are being flushed correctly when the cache manager stops
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v7.13.8#713008)
6 years, 5 months