Manik Surtani wrote: > On 24 Feb 2009, at 16:41, Bela Ban wrote: >> >> >> Manik Surtani wrote: >>> Yes, but it relies on an open stream between the 2 instances. >>> State is written without a flush, and then a marker is placed on >>> the stream asking the state requester to start a partial flush so >>> that the final tx log can be written to the stream as well. >> >> IIRC the marker is on the TX log, so you can use either streaming >> or regular state transfer. Whether or not we use streaming state >> transfer should be hidden from the caller of Channel.getState() > Nope. Regular state tfr will wait till the entire state is ready > and then transfer the byte buffer. This is no good for NBST since, > with NBST, here is what happens: > 1. Joiner (Cache B) joins, requests state from Cache A > 2. A generates and starts streaming state to B > 3. When state is transferred, A starts streaming tx log > 4. When remaining tx log is small, A puts a marker on the stream > 5. B sees this marker and requests a flush > 6. Once flush is detected by A, write remaining tx log and *this* > ends the state transfer process. 7. B releases the flush > So when using regular state tfr, B will not see the marker placed > by A in step 4, since the stream is flushed to a byte buffer and > transferred in 6. A will never get to step 6 until B starts a > flush in step 5. And for this to happen, state needs to stream > across constantly and not wait for the state generation process to > complete. Writing all of your state to a big byte array is a bad idea anyway ;)