11:54 a.m.
[
https://jira.jboss.org/jira/browse/ISPN-149?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugi...
]
Galder Zamarreno reopened ISPN-149:
-----------------------------------
Assignee: Galder Zamarreno (was: Mircea Markus)
Reopening to implement suggested changes on IRC:
Aug 11 15:46:37 <galderz> hi manik
Aug 11 15:47:05 <manik> galderz hi
Aug 11 15:47:12 <galderz> if we need to write a positive number bigger than a byte,
what would you suggest? writing it as a short, assuming short is good enough, or use a
unsigned int which has variable length?
Aug 11 15:48:58 <galderz> dmlloyd too, thoughts on the above? mmarkus_, u might be
interested in hearing other people's opinion
Aug 11 15:49:06 <galderz> personally, i think i'd stick to a short
Aug 11 15:50:03 <manik> galderz what is this for?
Aug 11 15:50:48 <galderz> ReplicableCommandExternalizer, send the number of
arguments
Aug 11 15:51:02 <galderz> we're previously using a byte but that was not good
enough, since max was 127 params
Aug 11 15:51:11 <galderz> and in long transactions, this was been exceeded
Aug 11 15:51:31 <galderz> https://jira.jboss.org/jira/browse/ISPN-149
Aug 11 15:58:04 <dmlloyd> use both
Aug 11 15:58:17 <dmlloyd> use a different ID byte if it's going to be > 255
Aug 11 15:58:23 <dmlloyd> (also, use an unsigned byte or unsigned short)
Aug 11 15:58:43 <dmlloyd> then it can be 1 byte in the majority of cases, or 2 if
you need the extra range
Aug 11 16:08:19 <manik> galderz yeah, otherwise a variable length int
Aug 11 16:09:05 <galderz> dmlloyd, manik, ok
Aug 11 16:09:19 <galderz> mmarkus_, do u want me to fix this accordingly?
Assigning it to myself.
Infinispan transaction commit with many modifications
-----------------------------------------------------
Key: ISPN-149
URL: https://jira.jboss.org/jira/browse/ISPN-149
Project: Infinispan
Issue Type: Bug
Affects Versions: 4.0.0.ALPHA6
Reporter: Mircea Markus
Assignee: Galder Zamarreno
Fix For: 4.0.0.BETA1
Email from Lukasz Moren
----------------------------
Hello,
During adapting Infinispan into Hibernate Search I found that trying to commit
transaction with many modifications (about 200 or more)
on cache causes an exception - only if there is more than one member in the cluster.
This same problem appears when try to call endBatch().
i.e.:
begin transaction
for ( int i = 0; i < 200; i++ )
cache.put(key, value);
commit transaction
I'm not sure if I do something wrong or it is Infinispan problem. Do you have some
idea?
Below is configuration I use.
GlobalConfiguration gc = GlobalConfiguration.getClusteredDefault();
Configuration c = new Configuration();
c.setInvocationBatchingEnabled( true );
c.setCacheMode( Configuration.CacheMode.REPL_SYNC );
c.setSyncReplTimeout( 30000 );
c.setLockAcquisitionTimeout( 60000 );
c.setUseLockStriping( false );
CacheManager manager = new DefaultCacheManager( gc, c );
cache = manager.getCache( "TestCache" );
manager = new DefaultCacheManager( gc, c );
cache2 = manager.getCache( "TestCache" );
------------------------
--
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