+1.. The Geode transaction is built to work efficiently with smaller transaction...Supporting large collections in a transaction will hurt Geode performance.
-Anil. On Thu, Feb 9, 2017 at 5:02 PM, Darrel Schneider <dschnei...@pivotal.io> wrote: > One other thing to note is that with this proposal read conflicts will also > not work on reads done by collections. > You enable read conflicts like so: -Dgemfire.detectReadConflicts=true > > On Thu, Feb 9, 2017 at 2:29 PM, Eric Shu <e...@pivotal.io> wrote: > > > All, > > > > In current Geode transaction implementation, there will be memory > pressure > > if collection is used in a transaction. (GEODE-2392 > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GEODE-2392). > > > > Geode transactions provide repeatable read semantics. In order to support > > this repeatable read isolation, all read operations copy the current > value > > in txState. > > > > The proposed new implementation is to have collection operation in a > > transaction not copying all values into its txState. Instead, it will go > > over to region directly but reflecting the new state of the entries > changed > > by the previous operations of this transaction. > > > > Please note that the proposed implementation will not support repeatable > > read for collection operations. > > > > Any thoughts? > > > > Regards, > > Eric > > >
