Hi Anil, I can't reproduce this issue. Would you please share a repro?
On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 9:04 AM, Anil <[email protected]> wrote: > HI Andrey, > > i have two records for my query. > i did not see same results if i hit the same query number times. Results > in number of records are empty, 1, 2. > > Thanks > > > > > On 22 March 2017 at 10:49, Andrey Mashenkov <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> Hi Anil, >> >> What do you mean "the results are not same"? It looks like query should >> return a single row. >> If there would be more than one row in result and order is not specified >> in query, then it is possible to get rows in different order due to data >> transferred from other nodes asynchronously. >> >> >> >> >> >> On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 7:02 AM, Anil <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Hi Andrew, >>> >>> #1 - it is very simple select query - select * from person hwere >>> personid = 'something'; >>> i just ran the query in for loop and noticed the results are not same. >>> >>> #2 - it is stable topology. swap is configured. but this test was done >>> when full load is completed and some compute job going on for other cache. >>> >>> Please let me know if you have any questions. thanks. >>> >>> Thanks. >>> >>> On 20 March 2017 at 21:07, Andrey Mashenkov <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi Anil, >>>> >>>> 1. Would you please share sql query text? >>>> >>>> 2. Is it happening on unstable topology or during rebalancing? Or may >>>> be eviction\expire policy or swap is configured? >>>> >>>> On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 5:41 PM, Anil <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Yes. i am using partition cache only with no joins :) >>>>> >>>>> how about #2 ? >>>>> >>>>> On 20 March 2017 at 19:20, Andrey Mashenkov < >>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Hi Anil, >>>>>> >>>>>> I should although mention that Replicated caches can participate in >>>>>> same query with partitioned caches regardless a degree of parallelizm. >>>>>> This limitation relates to partitioned caches only. >>>>>> >>>>>> On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 3:54 PM, Andrey Mashenkov < >>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Hi Anil, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> It is ok. Doc says *"If a query contains JOINs, then all the >>>>>>> participating caches must have the same degree of parallelism.".* >>>>>>> Possibly, it is easy to fix but there can be unobvious limitations, >>>>>>> so we need a time to make a POC. >>>>>>> I believe, it will be fixed in future releases. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 1:11 PM, Anil <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Hi Andrey, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I see few more issues with IGNITE-4826 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> 1. queryParallelism should be used for all caches for which queries >>>>>>>> are used other it throws following exception. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Caused by: java.sql.SQLException: Failed to query Ignite. >>>>>>>> at org.apache.ignite.internal.jdb >>>>>>>> c2.JdbcStatement.executeQuery(JdbcStatement.java:131) >>>>>>>> at org.apache.ignite.internal.jdb >>>>>>>> c2.JdbcPreparedStatement.executeQuery(JdbcPreparedStatement. >>>>>>>> java:76) >>>>>>>> at org.apache.commons.dbcp2.Deleg >>>>>>>> atingPreparedStatement.executeQuery(DelegatingPreparedStatem >>>>>>>> ent.java:83) >>>>>>>> at org.apache.commons.dbcp2.Deleg >>>>>>>> atingPreparedStatement.executeQuery(DelegatingPreparedStatem >>>>>>>> ent.java:83) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Caused by: javax.cache.CacheException: class >>>>>>>> org.apache.ignite.IgniteException: Using indexes with different >>>>>>>> parallelism levels in same query is forbidden. >>>>>>>> at org.apache.ignite.internal.pro >>>>>>>> cessors.cache.IgniteCacheProxy.query(IgniteCacheProxy.java:760) >>>>>>>> at org.apache.ignite.internal.jdb >>>>>>>> c2.JdbcQueryTask.call(JdbcQueryTask.java:161) >>>>>>>> at org.apache.ignite.internal.jdb >>>>>>>> c2.JdbcStatement.executeQuery(JdbcStatement.java:116) >>>>>>>> ... 13 more >>>>>>>> 2. query is not returning same result if it is hit number of times. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> please let me know if these are known issues. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Thanks >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> Best regards, >>>>>>> Andrey V. Mashenkov >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> Best regards, >>>>>> Andrey V. Mashenkov >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Best regards, >>>> Andrey V. Mashenkov >>>> >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> Best regards, >> Andrey V. Mashenkov >> > > -- Best regards, Andrey V. Mashenkov
