On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 6:20 PM, Christian F. Howes <
christian.ho...@starmakerinteractive.com> wrote:
> is the object part of an entity group? there is a limit on the number of
> writes to an entity group (with or without transactions)
>
Yep, and, note that "being part of an entity group" just
Also a nearly guaranteed way to create contention is to modify an entity
and then non-transactionally enqueue a task which modifies that entity. The
task fires immediately and the two writes conflict.
The great thing about enqueueing transactional tasks is that the task is
guaranteed to fire
is the object part of an entity group? there is a limit on the number of
writes to an entity group (with or without transactions)
On Tuesday, December 15, 2015 at 12:02:23 PM UTC-8, Yun Li wrote:
>
> And there is NO transaction at all. We don't use transaction. But I am not
> sure if objectify
And there is NO transaction at all. We don't use transaction. But I am not
sure if objectify uses the transaction in put.
On Thursday, December 3, 2015 at 9:59:00 PM UTC-8, Jeff Schnitzer wrote:
>
> You'll need to post some more code details - including the structure of
> the object you are
Entity entity= EntityDao.get(entityID);
// get parameters, gpsLat, batteryLevel...etc.
queue.add(TaskOptions.Builder.withUrl("/update").param(Parameters.EntityID,
entityID).param("gpsLong", gpsLong)
.param("gpsLat", gpsLat)
You'll need to post some more code details - including the structure of the
object you are trying to change. Also you don't mention whether this is an
exception or just a log message. It's easy to accidentally create
contention with the task queue, especially if you're in a transaction and
I am using Objectify. This error happens when updating a single datastore
entity. There is NO TRANSACTION. My working flow as follows:
1 Entity entity1 = Objectify.read(id1)
2 Modify entity1's property and put "update(entity1)" in a taskqueue
3 When task executes: Objectify.save(entity1)
Then I
