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 <yzhda...@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 <yzhda...@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 <yzhda...@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 <vladis...@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.goncha...@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. > >>> > > >>> > >> > >> > > >
