Yes, if you mark a message as OOB, then order won't get preserved, but
JGroups does guarantee delivery.
I just returned from my vacation and will post a more detailed message
on TUE
Vladimir Blagojevic wrote:
I believe this should be possible if you use OOB messages and custom
headers. Let's confirm with Bela.
Manik Surtani wrote:
> The concurrent stack has done a great job in parallelizing delivery
> of messages from different senders, but is there a way to parallelize
> this from the same sender as well? Now I know this doesn't make
> sense in terms of JGroups messages (order needs to be maintained) but
> when you consider moving up one level of abstraction in JBC, this
> causes a bottleneck. Consider, for example:
>
> 1. Using sync replication and BR.
> 2. 3 threads on cache1, working on disjoint data sets (no contention
> at all, writes can be in parallel).
> 3. When it comes to replication to the same buddy, the concurrent
> stack on the receiver will queue the 3 commits.
> 4. All parallelization achieved in 2. above is wasted since the
> transactions need to queue anyway.
>
> Is there something we can do with custom message headers, etc. to
> allow for parallel delivery of these messages? E.g., perhaps using a
> "communication id", which could be a representation of a global
> transaction? Bela, Vladimir, any thoughts?
>
> Cheers,
> --
> Manik Surtani
> Lead, JBoss Cache
> manik(a)jboss.org
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> jbosscache-dev mailing list
> jbosscache-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbosscache-dev
_______________________________________________
jbosscache-dev mailing list
jbosscache-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbosscache-dev
--
Bela Ban
Lead JGroups / JBoss Clustering team
JBoss - a division of Red Hat