[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-22286?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17849340#comment-17849340
]
Denis Chudov commented on IGNITE-22286:
---------------------------------------
The profit of the client-side timeout is not clear in comparison to server-side
timeout. We should do some benchmarks first.
I created IGNITE-22329 to check that another (timeout) deadlock prevention
policy would be operable.
> Remove waitTimeout in deadlock prevention policy
> ------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: IGNITE-22286
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-22286
> Project: Ignite
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Affects Versions: 3.0.0-beta1
> Reporter: Alexey Scherbakov
> Priority: Major
> Labels: ignite-3
> Fix For: 3.0
>
>
> After IGNITE-21540 and IGNITE-20127 we now have proper retries on client side.
> This means we no longer need
> org.apache.ignite.internal.tx.DeadlockPreventionPolicy#waitTimeout as a part
> of deadock prevention policy.
> Moreover, client side retries has benefit in the following scenario (having
> in mind WAIT_DIE prevention):
> # tx1 takes lock at timestamp 10
> # tx2 tries to take lock at timestamp 20 and goes for retry (without holding
> lock)
> # tx1 lock is released
> # tx3 takes lock at timestamp 30
> # tx3 lock is released
> # tx2 attemps to lock after retry and succeeds
> Without retry (without holding locks) on step 2 tx3 would retry too on step 4.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.10#820010)
