On 9/16/11 12:58 PM, Manik Surtani wrote:
On 15 Sep 2011, at 15:41, Paolo Romano wrote:
Do you want to increase the value stored in the i-th entry of each
data item updated by a committing transaction independently (i.e.
data_item.VC[i]=data_item.VC[i]+1 instead of
On Sep 14, 2011, at 4:03 PM, Manik Surtani wrote:
So I've been hacking on versioned entries for a bit now, and want to run the
designs by everyone. Adding an EntryVersion to each entry is easy, making
this optional and null by default easy too, and a SimpleVersion a wrapper
around a long
On Sep 16, 2011, at 1:58 PM, Manik Surtani wrote:
On 16 Sep 2011, at 12:11, Galder Zamarreño wrote:
On Sep 14, 2011, at 4:03 PM, Manik Surtani wrote:
So I've been hacking on versioned entries for a bit now, and want to run
the designs by everyone. Adding an EntryVersion to each entry
On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 7:48 PM, Sanne Grinovero sa...@infinispan.org wrote:
Wouldn't the node performing the operation always do an RPC anyway iff
the intended operation is to replace a specific value?
I was thinking along the same lines, if there is no value in the
InvocationContext (L0
On 09/14/2011 04:03 PM, Manik Surtani wrote:
So I've been hacking on versioned entries for a bit now, and want to run the
designs by everyone. Adding an EntryVersion to each entry is easy, making
this optional and null by default easy too, and a SimpleVersion a wrapper
around a long and a
On 14 Sep 2011, at 17:48, Sanne Grinovero wrote:
Wouldn't the node performing the operation always do an RPC anyway iff
the intended operation is to replace a specific value?
Examples:
- If I do a put() operation which doesn't skip the return value, the
RPC has to be perfomed, we get
On 15 Sep 2011, at 13:32, Tristan Tarrant wrote:
On 09/14/2011 04:03 PM, Manik Surtani wrote:
So I've been hacking on versioned entries for a bit now, and want to run the
designs by everyone. Adding an EntryVersion to each entry is easy, making
this optional and null by default easy too,
Interesting stuff Manik, thanks for the updates. Actually, on our side
we've also been working on adding versioning to ISPN during the summer.
However, in our case we are aiming at achieving serializability avoiding
global synchronization points (so we're actually keeping chains of
versions
On 9/15/11 2:51 PM, Manik Surtani wrote:
On 15 Sep 2011, at 14:44, Paolo Romano wrote:
Concerning costs. For option 2), the prepare message should piggyback
the version identifiers of *each* data item that needs to be write-skew
checked...which may lead to big messages, if you needed to test
So I've been hacking on versioned entries for a bit now, and want to run the
designs by everyone. Adding an EntryVersion to each entry is easy, making this
optional and null by default easy too, and a SimpleVersion a wrapper around a
long and a PartitionTolerantVersion being a vector clock
Wouldn't the node performing the operation always do an RPC anyway iff
the intended operation is to replace a specific value?
Examples:
- If I do a put() operation which doesn't skip the return value, the
RPC has to be perfomed, we get the current version value which is what
we will check to be
11 matches
Mail list logo
