Thanks for your answers, thats what I understood from documentation. Then I see a potential point of failure. If a transaction in site-1 is not completely sent to site-2, you have to ensure that applications using the inconsistent data of site-2 are able to detect that or are prepared to handle it.
After reading the documentation, I was wondering if it could be possible to send all events of a transaction using the same dispatcher thread of a serial sender with "partition" policy taking into account that regions involved on the transaction are colocated. Doing this, each batch of events sent would contain almost only complete transactions. BR/ Alberto ________________________________ De: Eric Shu <e...@pivotal.io> Enviado: viernes, 17 de enero de 2020 19:35 Para: user@geode.apache.org <user@geode.apache.org> Asunto: Re: WAN replication of transactions The transaction is not supported across the wan sites. If inconsistent state occurred due to a network problem between the wan sites, the inconsistency would exist during the network outage. However, once the network problem is resolved, the wan gateway would resume sending the events again. Two sides would be eventually consistent. The persistence and redundancy mentioned by Anil would be useful if the senders are down (HA scenario). Regards, Eric On Fri, Jan 17, 2020 at 6:48 AM Anilkumar Gingade <aging...@pivotal.io<mailto:aging...@pivotal.io>> wrote: Currently in Geode events are not transactional (WAN events, Client/server subscription events). To enable guaranteed event delivery It provides capability like persistence and redundancy. -Anil. On Fri, Jan 17, 2020 at 3:01 AM Alberto Bustamante Reyes <alberto.bustamante.re...@est.tech> wrote: Hi all, I have a question about transactions and WAN replication. If a transaction generates an event for each operation, is it possible to ensure that those operations are received together on the other site? There is a risk of having a site with an inconsistent state if there is a network problem. Lets say you have two sites, and communication between them is broken when not all events of a transaction on site 1 where sent to site 2. How are you dealing with this risk? Have someone experimented this? Thanks, BR/ Alberto
