ignite-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dmitriy Setrakyan <dsetrak...@apache.org>
Subject Re: affinityCall in one distributed transaction
Date Fri, 09 Dec 2016 01:46:55 GMT
Just clarified that all invoke(..) and invokeAll(..) methods are
transactional. Can someone familiar with these methods update the javadoc?

Igor, will invoke(..) work for your use case?

D.

On Wed, Dec 7, 2016 at 5:09 PM, Dmitriy Setrakyan <dsetrakyan@apache.org>
wrote:

> Taras, is invokeAll() transactional? The javadoc is silent to this fact.
> If it is indeed transactional, then we should update the javadoc.
>
> D.
>
> On Wed, Dec 7, 2016 at 5:32 AM, Taras Ledkov <tledkov@gridgain.com> wrote:
>
>> Ignite compute has no relation to the cache's transaction.
>>
>> I think that IgniteCache.invokeAll() is appropriate for described case.
>>
>> On Wed, Dec 7, 2016 at 4:00 PM, Игорь Г <frenel@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > Hi, igniters!
>> >
>> > Before openning JIRA ticket, I want to ask question about affinityCall
>> or
>> > affinityRun transactions.
>> >
>> > For example I have batch task to modify many values in someCache
>> according
>> > to someRule. I want to parallel this task to whole cluster and minimize
>> > network traffic.
>> > So the resonable choice is affinityCall feature.
>> >
>> > But I want all this changes to be in one transactoin. i.e. with at least
>> > atomicity property (of ACID). And if for some reason my task will be
>> > canceled or failed on one node - it should change nothing at all.
>> >
>> > So, can I achieve this with existing functionality, or how can I
>> approach
>> > to this task?
>> >
>>
>
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message