[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6276?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16032599#comment-16032599
]
Stefan Egli commented on OAK-6276:
----------------------------------
bq. So I would treat just like current support for Clusterable which is
currently only implemented by DocumentNodeStore.
My point about a SegmentNodeStore implementation for this was just that it
might be good if we had a broad idea of how this could be done (easily), not
that we're actually doing it. Agree that it's only needed for the cluster case
anyway. But perhaps some time in the future there might be a clustered
SegmentNodeStore - at which point this could become relevant again.
bq. what happens if the token never occurs?
bq. one node might go through r1 -> r2 -> r4, another node might go through r1
-> r3 -> r4
as long as there's a way to say that r3 or r4 contains r2 we should be fine. If
not then we'd have an issue.
> expose way to detect "eventual consistency delay"
> -------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: OAK-6276
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6276
> Project: Jackrabbit Oak
> Issue Type: New Feature
> Components: api
> Reporter: Stefan Egli
>
> I have a requirement to support an external messaging channel (eg Kafka)
> between Oak-based instances of the same cluster. As part of handling those
> messages the target instance in some cases might have to access data from the
> repository.
> Now with DocumentNodeStore's eventual consistency that data might not
> 'travel' from the source to the target instance as fast as is the case for
> the external message.
> Therefore the need arises to be able to delay such messages (on the target
> instance) until the repository sees (at least) the data the source instance
> wrote when sending off the message.
> This ticket is to equip Oak with any feasible way for higher level code to
> generally speaking detect such an "eventual consistency delay".
> One simple idea that comes to mind is to expose the current _head revision
> vector_ (or that from a particular session, but that might not be required,
> ie be too complicated). The source instance could get the local head revision
> vector, piggyback that on the message, then that could be compared on the
> target instance with its head state. If that turns out to be older, then it
> could do a wait and retry. (Nicer would of course be if there would even be a
> call-back - but in theory that could also be implemented ontop of an
> Observer).
> One means to expose the head revision vector would be via a repository
> descriptor (which on access returns the current value, similar to [how
> discovery-lite does
> it|https://github.com/apache/jackrabbit-oak/blob/2634dbde9aedc2549f0512285e9abee5858b256f/oak-core/src/main/java/org/apache/jackrabbit/oak/plugins/document/DocumentDiscoveryLiteService.java#L246]).
> And the format could be normalized as eg {{longs}} (eg {{\[1496071927014,
> 1496071926243]}} (instead of {{\["r15c54d532ec-0-1", "r15c54d532ec-0-2"]}} to
> avoid leaking the revision format explicitly).
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)
