[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-9?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16118120#comment-16118120
 ] 

Alexey Kuznetsov edited comment on IGNITE-9 at 8/8/17 11:11 AM:
----------------------------------------------------------------

[~yzhdanov] Currently, as it implemented at *GridCacheLockImpl* when one node 
waits on condition, signal (on condition with the same name, with the same 
lock) from another node cannot awake it.
Only signal from the same node works.(attached test for it)
Should we provide the same behavior for *IngniteReentrantReadWriteLock*, for 
read lock and write lock ?

Why do we need to provide name when creating condition in  
org.apache.ignite.IgniteLock#getOrCreateCondition()?(As conditions from 
different nodes seems not to be connected)


was (Author: alexey kuznetsov):
[~yzhdanov] Currently, as it implemented at *GridCacheLockImpl* when one node 
waits on condition, signal (on condition with the same name, with the same 
lock) from another node cannot awake it.
Only signal from the same node works.
Should we provide the same behavior for *IngniteReentrantReadWriteLock*, for 
read lock and write lock ?

Why do we need to provide name when creating condition in  
org.apache.ignite.IgniteLock#getOrCreateCondition()?(As conditions from 
different nodes seems not to be connected)

> Need to implement IngniteReentrantReadWriteLock
> -----------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: IGNITE-9
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-9
>             Project: Ignite
>          Issue Type: Task
>          Components: general
>            Reporter: Yakov Zhdanov
>            Assignee: Alexey Kuznetsov
>         Attachments: IgniteReentrantReadWriteLockSelfTest.java
>
>
> See org.apache.ignite.IgniteLock for reference



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)

Reply via email to