Hey guys, Several things were discussed lately([1],[2],[3],[4]) around our transaction support. Here's some some thoughts I have around re-modeling transactions for 7.0:
1. Async options for commit/rollback - they don't really make sense as a user you don't get any guarantee on the status of the transaction - they complicate the code significantly - I think they should be removed 2. READ_COMMITTED - it has the same performance as REPEATABLE_READ, but offers less guarantees. - unlike REPEATABLE_READ, it also behaves inconsistently when the data is owned by transaction originator - I think it should be removed 3. Optimistic tx without Write Skew Check (WSC) - well, without WSC the transactions are not optimistic by definition - they are something else: an batch update of multiple key/values. If the batch is successful you know the update was atomic. If it failed you don't get any guarantee - suggestion: optimistic tx should *always* have WSC enabled (no option to configure it) - build our batching functionality on top of what currently is optimistic tx without WSC and document it as such 4. Remove 1PC option - I'm not totally sure about it, but does it really make sense to have 1PC as an option? they don't offer any consistency guarantees so async API + non tx do about the same thing [1] http://markmail.org/thread/a7fjko4dyejxqgdy [2] https://github.com/infinispan/infinispan/pull/2177 [3] http://infinispan.markmail.org/thread/nl2bs7rjvayjcybv [4] http://infinispan.markmail.org/thread/vbg6g4otu7djazbc Cheers, -- Mircea Markus Infinispan lead (www.infinispan.org) _______________________________________________ infinispan-dev mailing list infinispan-dev@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev
