Hi Gustavo, thanks for the help !
Indeed, I stopped using the rv variable because I realised it was not
always the compute command result, and somehow I decided I could not take
for granted in the code that this is the compute command result value. But
I think this the case only when the PrepareCommand is called on tx mode for
this particular case.
What confused me a lot in this matter are commands like RemoveCommand, for
example.
private void processRemoveCommand(final RemoveCommand command, final
InvocationContext
ctx, final Object valueRemoved, TransactionContext transactionContext)
When this method is called from the visitPrepareCommand method, we
indeed pass the previous value found just before the call in the
cache.
But after, when the same method is called from the visitRemoveCommand
we passe the rv parameter. Which is the Remove Command perfom method
answer.
So, having a look to the RemoveCommand, I can see sometimes we indeed
return the prev value. But it might happen depending to return a
boolean instead.
remove("key", "value")cache2.remove("newGoat");
*LOGS*
Thread => 79
ctx.getOrigin() => ClusteredCacheWithElasticsearchIndexManagerIT-NodeA-15125
valueRemoved => Person{name='newGoat', blurb='eats something', age=42,
dateOfGraduation=null}
Thread => 38
ctx.getOrigin() => ClusteredCacheWithElasticsearchIndexManagerIT-NodeB-23459
valueRemoved => Person{name='newGoat', blurb='eats something', age=42,
dateOfGraduation=null}
Thread => 47
ctx.getOrigin() => null
valueRemoved => Person{name='newGoat', blurb='eats something', age=42,
dateOfGraduation=null}
*removeFromIndexes method is called !!!*
But if we call remove with specific value, the method
removeFromIndexes is never called.
cache2.remove("newGoat", person4);
*LOGS*
Thread => 79
ctx.getOrigin() => ClusteredCacheWithElasticsearchIndexManagerIT-NodeA-22063
valueRemoved => true
Thread => 38
ctx.getOrigin() => ClusteredCacheWithElasticsearchIndexManagerIT-NodeB-47249
valueRemoved => true
Thread => 47
ctx.getOrigin() => null
valueRemoved => true
But in both cases the remove seems to be working, because this assertions work.
found = searchManager.<Person>getQuery(allQuery, Person.class).list();
assertEquals(0, found.size());
I'm a bit confused about all this, but we can chat o IRC or bluejeans.
It might be some bugs concerning this interceptor, Radim has already
opened an issue on this matter.
Katia
On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 3:33 PM, Gustavo Fernandes <gust...@infinispan.org>
wrote:
> The test fails every time NodeB (cache2) happens to *not be* the primary
> owner of 'newGoat', and needs to forward the command to NodeA. Sequence of
> events:
>
> 1) [NodeB] Compute is called, key is 'newGoat'
> 2) [NodeB] Command gets visited by the QueryInterceptor, that suspends the
> execution
> 3) [NodeB] Owner for 'newGoat' is nodeA, so nodeB forwards the command to
> nodeA
>
> 4) [NodeA] Command gets visited by the QueryInterceptor, that suspends the
> execution
> 5) [NodeA] perform() is called in the Compute command
> 6) [NodeA] Command is then sent to NodeB, which is a backup owner
>
> 7) [NodeB] Command gets visited by the QueryInterceptor, that suspends the
> execution
> 8) [NodeB] perform() is called in the compute command
> 9) [NodeB] QueryInterceptor resumes execution. Since command was
> originated remotely, no indexing is done (due to Index.LOCAL)
>
> 9) [NodeA] Receive response from the call done on 6)
> 10)[NodeA] resumes execution from the QueryInterceptor from 4)
> 11)[NodeA] Since command was originated remotely, no indexing is done (due
> to Index.LOCAL)
>
> 12)[NodeB] receives response from 3). At this point *the computed value
> is available* as the return type of the remote invocation
> 13)[NodeB] resumes the QueryInterceptor invocation from 2)
> 14)[NodeB] processComputes is then executed, but since the computedValue
> is not available in the command itself nor in the context, indexing is
> skipped since there is no value to index or remove
>
>
> Looking at the method visitComputCommand, the variable "rv" stores the
> return value from the command, but it's not being used, instead the
> stateBeforeCompute is used which is always null in this scenario,
> because it is evaluated on 2) which is before the the key exists in the
> data container:
>
> return invokeNextThenAccept(ctx, command, (rCtx, rCommand, rv) ->
> processComputeCommand(((ComputeCommand) rCommand), rCtx, stateBeforeCompute,
> null));
>
>
> Gustavo
>
>
> On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 2:21 PM, Katia Aresti <kare...@redhat.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I'm really struggling with something in order to finish the compute
>> methods.
>>
>> I added a test in *ClusteredCacheWithElasticsearchIndexManagerIT*
>>
>> public void testToto() throws Exception {
>> SearchManager searchManager = Search.getSearchManager(cache2);
>> QueryBuilder queryBuilder = searchManager
>> .buildQueryBuilderForClass(Person.class)
>> .get();
>> Query allQuery = queryBuilder.all().createQuery();
>>
>> String key = "newGoat";
>> Person person4 = new Person(key, "eats something", 42);
>>
>> cache2.putIfAbsent(key, person4);
>> StaticTestingErrorHandler.assertAllGood(cache1, cache2);
>>
>> List<Person> found = searchManager.<Person>getQuery(allQuery,
>> Person.class).list();
>> assertEquals(1, found.size());
>> assertTrue(found.contains(person4));
>> }
>>
>> I put some logs in the processPutKeyValueCommand method in the
>> *QueryInterceptor* to explain what is happening.
>>
>> *2 threads*
>> Sometimes two threads get involved.
>>
>> = Thread 72 First (or second) call
>> It happens from a non local Node. The so the shouldModifyIndexes says
>> "no, you should not modify any index" because the
>> IndexModificationStrategy is set to "LOCAL ONLY". [1]
>>
>> 72 ctx.getOrigin() = ClusteredCacheWithElasticsearc
>> hIndexManagerIT-NodeB-19565
>> 72 should modify false
>> 72 previousValue null
>> 72 putValue Person{name='newGoat', blurb='eats something', age=42,
>> dateOfGraduation=null} // value in the command
>> 72 contextValue Person{name='newGoat', blurb='eats something', age=42,
>> dateOfGraduation=null} //value in the invocation context
>>
>> = Thread 48 Second (or first) call
>> the origin is null, and this is considered as a LOCAL in the
>> SingleKeyNonTxInvocationContext. [2] In this case, the index is modified
>> correctly, the value in the context has already been set up by the
>> PutKeyValueCommand and the index get's correctly updated.
>>
>> 48 ctx.getOrigin() = null
>> 48 should modify true
>> 48 previousValue null
>> 48 putValue Person{name='newGoat', blurb='eats something', age=42,
>> dateOfGraduation=null}
>> 48 contextValue Person{name='newGoat', blurb='eats something', age=42,
>> dateOfGraduation=null}
>>
>> And everything is ok. Everything is fine too in the case of a compute
>> method instead of the put method.
>>
>> But sometimes, this is not executed like that.
>>
>> *3 threads*
>>
>> What is a bit more weird to me is this second scenario where the commands
>> are executed both from non local nodes (A and B). And so the index is not
>> updated.
>> But just later, another thread get's involved and calls the
>> QueryInterceptor with a invocation context where the command has not been
>> executed (the value is not inside the context and the debugger does not
>> enter in the perform method, this has happened just twice before). This
>> call is coming like from a callback? in the QueueAsyncInvocationStage.
>>
>> 80 ctx.getOrigin() = ClusteredCacheWithElasticsearc
>> hIndexManagerIT-NodeA-65110
>> 80 should modify false
>> 80 prev null
>> 80 putValue Person{name='newGoat', blurb='eats something', age=42,
>> dateOfGraduation=null}
>> 80 contextValue Person{name='newGoat', blurb='eats something', age=42,
>> dateOfGraduation=null}
>>
>> 38 ctx.getOrigin() = ClusteredCacheWithElasticsearc
>> hIndexManagerIT-NodeB-35919
>> 38 should modify false
>> 38 prev null
>> 38 putValue Person{name='newGoat', blurb='eats something', age=42,
>> dateOfGraduation=null}
>> 38 contextValue Person{name='newGoat', blurb='eats something', age=42,
>> dateOfGraduation=null}
>>
>> 48 ctx.getOrigin() = null
>> 48 should modify true
>> 48 prev null
>> 48 putValue Person{name='newGoat', blurb='eats something', age=42,
>> dateOfGraduation=null}
>> 48 contextValue null
>>
>>
>> This execution works perfectly with PutKeyValueCommand. But don't work
>> wth compute.
>>
>> The "computed value" is not inside the Command like put, replace or
>> others. It is computed in the perform method (if needed). So, the first
>> time the command is executed in A, the computed value is in the context,
>> but the index is not updated. Second call, executed in B, value in context,
>> but the index is not updated. The magic callback is executed, but the
>> computed value is nowhere because the command is not executed a third time,
>> so the context is null.
>>
>> Can somebody please give me some light on this and explain to me what am
>> I missing ? Other tests are failing for the same problem,
>> like org.infinispan.query.blackbox.ClusteredCacheWithInfinis
>> panDirectoryTest
>>
>> Thank you very much for your help !
>>
>> Katia
>>
>> [1] https://github.com/infinispan/infinispan/blob/master/que
>> ry/src/main/java/org/infinispan/query/backend/IndexModificat
>> ionStrategy.java#L50
>> [2] https://github.com/infinispan/infinispan/blob/master/cor
>> e/src/main/java/org/infinispan/context/SingleKeyNonTxInvocat
>> ionContext.java#L39
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
