On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 11:42 AM, Valentin Kulichenko <
valentin.kuliche...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Dmitry,
>
> Transaction is not started on a particular cache, it's separate top-level
> API. You can then include operations on different caches, like this:
>
> try (Transaction tx = ignite.transactions.txStart()) {
> cache1.put(..);
> cache2.put(..);
> cache3.put(..);
>
> tx.commit();
> }
>
> In the code above it's easy to think that all three operations are enlisted
> in transaction, but if one of the caches happens to be atomic (due to
> misconfiguration, for example), that's actually not true. And we don't even
> warn user about this.
>
Got it.
But what if a user really needs to update an atomic cache from within some
transactional logic? I think we should allow it, but print out an warning
to the log on per-cache basis the first time we see some atomic cache used
from within a transaction.
D.
