Would you please evaluate another variant: use READ_COMMITTED mode and invoke
an EntryProcessor to acquire explicit lock
--
View this message in context:
http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/Explicit-lock-whithin-a-transaction-tp8586p9106.html
Sent from the Apache Ignite Users
-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/Explicit-lock-whithin-a-transaction-tp8586p9104.html
Sent from the Apache Ignite Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
.x6.nabble.com/Explicit-lock-whithin-a-transaction-tp8586p9102.html
Sent from the Apache Ignite Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
s.70518.x6.nabble.com/Explicit-lock-whithin-a-transaction-tp8586p9089.html
Sent from the Apache Ignite Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
of them must be locked
--
View this message in context:
http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/Explicit-lock-whithin-a-transaction-tp8586p9069.html
Sent from the Apache Ignite Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
.nabble.com/Explicit-lock-whithin-a-transaction-tp8586p9061.html
Sent from the Apache Ignite Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
objects I need to read until I come to certain point within
transaction.
In SQL I have following options:
- read without lock - select ...
- read and lock - select ... for update
--
View this message in context:
http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/Explicit-lock-whithin-a-transaction
PESSIMISTIC-READ_COMMITTED locks ALL objects I read in transaction. It's
overkill
I need to readAndLock for some objects and readWithoutLock for others
--
View this message in context:
http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/Explicit-lock-whithin-a-transaction-tp8586p9054.html
Sent
/Explicit-lock-whithin-a-transaction-tp8586p8593.html
--
View this message in context:
http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/Explicit-lock-whithin-a-transaction-tp8586p9051.html
Sent from the Apache Ignite Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
May be I should use empty EntryProcessor for this?
--
View this message in context:
http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/Explicit-lock-whithin-a-transaction-tp8586p8647.html
Sent from the Apache Ignite Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
We don't need lock ALL entries on read, only SOME of them.
Typically we need lock objects which will be modified latter in the
transactions but we don't want lock all read-only objects
--
View this message in context:
http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/Explicit-lock-whithin
Hi,
You should use PESSIMISTIC, REPEATABLE_READ transaction in this case. It
will lock the entry on read.
-Val
--
View this message in context:
http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/Explicit-lock-whithin-a-transaction-tp8586p8593.html
Sent from the Apache Ignite Users mailing list
it by: select *
from table where id=? *FOR UPDATE*
How can I do something similar with Ignite?
--
View this message in context:
http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/Explicit-lock-whithin-a-transaction-tp8586.html
Sent from the Apache Ignite Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
13 matches
Mail list logo