[infinispan-dev] Conflict Manager and Partition Handling Blog

[Ryan Emerson]

No problem, my intention is to issue a PR later this week.

----- Original Message -----
> On 1 August 2017 at 12:19, Ryan Emerson <remerson at redhat.com> wrote:
> >> The option `REMOVE_ALL` seems sensible for the disposable Cache use
> >> case. One question though: if one partition has a defined value for a
> >> key, while the other partition has no value (null) for this same key,
> >> is it considered a conflict?
> >> I think you need to clarify if a "null" in a subset of partitions
> >> causes the conflict merge to be triggered or not. I think it should:
> >> for example having the cache use case in mind, an explicit
> >> invalidation needs to be propagated safely.
> >
> > Yes a combination of null/non-null entries is detected as a conflict. So in
> > the use-case you describe, utilising the REMOVE_ALL strategy would result
> > in the cache entry being removed from the cache on merge.
> 
> Thanks, looks great. Would you mind clarifying the docs about this?
> 
> Sanne
> 
> >
> > Cheers
> > Ryan
> > _______________________________________________
> > infinispan-dev mailing list
> > infinispan-dev at lists.jboss.org
> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev
> _______________________________________________
> infinispan-dev mailing list
> infinispan-dev at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev
>