ignite-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Vladisav Jelisavcic <vladis...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Semaphore blocking on tryAcquire() while holding a cache-lock
Date Sun, 27 Mar 2016 09:30:46 GMT
Yakov, I've seen your comments, can you please check the jira again?


On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 4:46 PM, Yakov Zhdanov <yzhdanov@apache.org> wrote:

> Vlad, can you please check my comments again?
>
> --Yakov
>
> 2016-03-18 17:57 GMT+03:00 Vladisav Jelisavcic <vladisavj@gmail.com>:
>
> > Hi Yakov,
> >
> > yes, thanks for the comments, I think everything should be ok now,
> > please review the PR and tell me if you think anything else is needed.
> >
> > Once ignite-642 is merged into master,
> > I'll submit a PR for IgniteReadWriteLock (hopefully on time for 1.6.
> > release).
> >
> > Best regrads,
> > Vladisav
> >
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 11:56 AM, Yakov Zhdanov <yzhdanov@gridgain.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Vlad, did you have a chance to review my latest comments?
> > >
> > > Thanks!
> > > --
> > > Yakov Zhdanov, Director R&D
> > > *GridGain Systems*
> > > www.gridgain.com
> > >
> > > 2016-03-06 12:21 GMT+03:00 Yakov Zhdanov <yzhdanov@apache.org>:
> > >
> > > > Vlad and all (esp Val and Anton V.),
> > > >
> > > > I reviewed the PR. My comments are in the ticket.
> > > >
> > > > Anton V. there is a question regarding
> optimized-classnames.properties.
> > > > Can you please respond in ticket?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --Yakov
> > > >
> > > > 2016-02-29 16:00 GMT+06:00 Yakov Zhdanov <yzhdanov@apache.org>:
> > > >
> > > >> Vlad, that's great! I will take a look this week. Reassigning ticket
> > to
> > > >> myself.
> > > >>
> > > >> --Yakov
> > > >>
> > > >> 2016-02-26 18:37 GMT+03:00 Vladisav Jelisavcic <vladisavj@gmail.com
> >:
> > > >>
> > > >>> Hi,
> > > >>>
> > > >>> i recently implemented distributed ReentrantLock - IGNITE-642,
> > > >>> i made a pull request, so hopefully this could be added to the
next
> > > >>> release.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Best regards,
> > > >>> Vladisav
> > > >>>
> > > >>> On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 10:49 AM, Alexey Goncharuk <
> > > >>> alexey.goncharuk@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >>>
> > > >>> > Folks,
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> > The current implementation of IgniteCache.lock(key).lock()
has
> the
> > > same
> > > >>> > semantics as the transactional locks - cache topology cannot
be
> > > changed
> > > >>> > while there exists an ongoing transaction or an explicit
lock is
> > > held.
> > > >>> The
> > > >>> > restriction for transactions is quite fundamental, the lock()
> issue
> > > >>> can be
> > > >>> > fixed if we re-implement locking the same way IgniteSemaphore
> > > currently
> > > >>> > works.
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> > As for the "Failed to find semaphore with the given name"
> message,
> > my
> > > >>> first
> > > >>> > guess is that DataStructures were configured with 1 backups
which
> > led
> > > >>> to
> > > >>> > the data loss when two nodes were stopped. Mario, can you
please
> > > >>> re-test
> > > >>> > your semaphore scenario with 2 backups configured for data
> > > structures?
> > > >>> > From my side, I can also take a look at the semaphore issue
when
> > I'm
> > > >>> done
> > > >>> > with IGNITE-2610.
> > > >>> >
> > > >>>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message