Hi Adam, On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 4:37 PM, Adam Rabung <adamrab...@gmail.com> wrote: > 1. This iterator will just prevent duplicates from being returned from > the iterator? If there's a condition (bug in my code) that causes > shutdown w/ open transactions, will the Lucene indexes continue to > double until they're huge? >
Yes, currently the index may get duplicate entries for each non clean shutdown. > 2. Would it be possible to detect this situation, and rebuild the > indexes? I guess this is a losing cause if the app is regularly > corrupting the data. > Yes, it is possible to rebuild the index if everything that needs re-index is reachable and stored in the graph. > 3. Could you allow me to close transacations from different threads? > Yesterday, I wrote something that tracks tx opens and closes, and > could iterate through all open transactions and call finish() on them. > But TransactionImpl.finish seems to assume the calling thread is the > creating thread, which is not the case here. > I would recommend not to do this. It is better to make sure each thread opening up a transaction manages that transaction and closes it properly. You can however change thread for a transaction using the TransactionManager's suspend() and resume() methods. > 4. Better yet, expose API for me to force-finish all open > transactions? I'd rather have a botched transaction than a corrupt > index. > I do not think that is a good solution. What if some thread detected that the running transaction has to be rolled back? If you concurrently force commit from another thread then... Something that may be possible to do is to force rollback any running transactions in shutdown and wait for any transaction that has reached the prepared/committing state to complete. > 5. Is the only condition for this open transactions + a Lucene > shutdown (via shutdown() OR abrubt process termination)? In further > testing, it seems I can't reproduce the problem w/ a clean or dirty > shutdown if all transactions are closed. > Correct, this will only happen after a crash/non clean shutdown marking the logical log as dirty (meaning recovery will be run on next startup replaying the logical log). > 6. I assume your iterator fix will make b11? What are the chances the > root cause will be fixed in b11? Do you have a tentative release date > for b11? > We are planing to release in mid december/before christmas. A real fix for this problem will not make it into that release so for now I would suggest to properly close the transactions in the thread that opens them. Regards, -Johan _______________________________________________ Neo mailing list User@lists.neo4j.org https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user
