On 2/13/12 4:59 PM, Mircea Markus wrote:
>> This use case cannot be supported by option #3 AFAICS: the bridge >> between LON and SFO is completely asynchronous and doesn't know >> anything >> about sync or async RPCs, so TX2 can be applied in SFO before TX1. > Why can't the bridge send the messages in the order in which they were > enqueued? It *does* deliver the messages in the order in which they were sent. I was referring to the async case in general: commits from different nodes hit the bridge in an undefined order; in your example it could be TX1 --> TX2 or TX2 --> TX1. (Note that I mixed up option #2 and option #1 in my previous email) -- Bela Ban Lead JGroups (http://www.jgroups.org) JBoss / Red Hat _______________________________________________ infinispan-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev
