Hi, I see such warnings in 1.7rc1 as well. Does it impact any data integrity?
Regards On Tuesday, September 17, 2013 10:25:49 PM UTC+5:30, [email protected] wrote: > > We adjusted the test code to explicitly turn on the level 1 cache and the > warning is still shown. > > We tried again in the main code and now we're not seeing any difference > (no additional exceptions). We did do a bit of refactoring and also updated > again to the latest SNAPSHOT (dated this morning), so that may have changed > the behavior. So now, however, we are seeing no difference in output with > level 1 cache enabled or disabled. The warning is shown either way. > > On Tuesday, September 17, 2013 9:35:14 AM UTC-5, Andrey Lomakin wrote: >> >> Hi Mike, >> If you disable 1-st level cache you will have these exception because it >> is main responsibility of given cache to prevent such cases. >> >> You wrote that you got exceptions when you enbable 1-st level cache could >> you send them ? >> >> >> On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 12:04 AM, <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> We've created code that reproduces this issue. I've created a Gist for >>> it at https://gist.github.com/mikeosterlie/f2c557aadb54370623da. When >>> the transaction is committed the warning is shown. >>> >>> >>> On Monday, September 16, 2013 3:37:54 PM UTC-5, [email protected] wrote: >>>> >>>> I think we've got this narrowed down. We're going to try to replicate >>>> the issue in a testcase, but the flow looks like this: >>>> >>>> We have a tree (doesn't matter, but it's an AVL tree implementation) >>>> made of vertices and edges. As part of a transaction we are deleting an >>>> edge between two nodes and creating an edge between a different set of >>>> nodes. We are using plocal so that RIDs are not reused, but the newly >>>> created edge is getting the same RID has the just deleted edge. This >>>> produces that warning as we now have two edges in the transaction with the >>>> same RID, but are different instances. >>>> >>>> I thought plocal did not reuse RIDs. >>>> >>>> On Monday, September 16, 2013 10:45:46 AM UTC-5, Andrey Lomakin wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 6:18 PM, <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> The warning was still displayed with level 1 cache on, and we ran >>>>>> into a lot of varied Exceptions as well. That might point to some logic >>>>>> issues in our code, and we have identified a potential cause based on >>>>>> Sylvain's posts as our logic could load the same record into two >>>>>> different >>>>>> variables. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> I am looking forward for your updates after code verification. >>>>> It would be good to fix this issue till 1.6 will be released. >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Best regards, >>>>> Andrey Lomakin. >>>>> >>>>> Orient Technologies >>>>> the Company behind OrientDB >>>>> >>>>> -- >>> >>> --- >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>> Groups "OrientDB" group. >>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>> an email to [email protected]. >>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Best regards, >> Andrey Lomakin. >> >> Orient Technologies >> the Company behind OrientDB >> >> -- --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "OrientDB" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
