It's not wrong, sending the invalidation only from the primary owner is wrong :)
On Tue, Jul 2, 2013 at 7:14 PM, Sanne Grinovero <sa...@infinispan.org>wrote: > I see, so we keep the wrong implementation because it's faster? > > :D > > On 2 July 2013 16:38, Dan Berindei <dan.berin...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > On Tue, Jul 2, 2013 at 6:36 PM, Pedro Ruivo <pe...@infinispan.org> > wrote: > >> > >> > >> > >> On 07/02/2013 04:21 PM, Sanne Grinovero wrote: > >> > +1 for considering it a BUG > >> > > >> > Didn't we decide a year ago that GET operations should be sent to a > >> > single node only (the primary) ? > >> > >> +1 :) > >> > > > > Manik had a patch for staggering remote GET calls, but it was slowing > down > > reads by 25%: http://markmail.org/message/vsx46qbfzzxkkl4w > > > >> > >> > > >> > On 2 July 2013 15:59, Pedro Ruivo <pe...@infinispan.org> wrote: > >> >> Hi all, > >> >> > >> >> simple question: What are the consistency guaranties that is supposed > >> >> to > >> >> be ensured? > >> >> > >> >> I have the following scenario (happened in a test case): > >> >> > >> >> NonOwner: remote get key > >> >> BackupOwner: receives the remote get and replies (with the correct > >> >> value) > >> >> BackupOwner: put in L1 the value > >> >> PrimaryOwner: [at the same time] is committing a transaction that > will > >> >> update the key. > >> >> PrimaryOwer: receives the remote get after sending the commit. The > >> >> invalidation for L1 is not sent to NonOwner. > >> >> > >> >> The test finishes and I perform a check for the key value in all the > >> >> caches. The NonOwner returns the L1 cached value (==test fail). > >> >> > >> >> IMO, this is bug (or not) depending what guaranties we provide. > >> >> > >> >> wdyt? > >> >> > >> >> Pedro > >> >> _______________________________________________ > >> >> infinispan-dev mailing list > >> >> infinispan-dev@lists.jboss.org > >> >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev > >> > _______________________________________________ > >> > infinispan-dev mailing list > >> > infinispan-dev@lists.jboss.org > >> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev > >> > > >> _______________________________________________ > >> infinispan-dev mailing list > >> infinispan-dev@lists.jboss.org > >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > infinispan-dev mailing list > > infinispan-dev@lists.jboss.org > > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev > _______________________________________________ > infinispan-dev mailing list > infinispan-dev@lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev >
_______________________________________________ infinispan-dev mailing list infinispan-dev@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev