ignite-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Yakov Zhdanov <yzhda...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Transaction semantics questions
Date Wed, 08 Feb 2017 04:43:12 GMT
Val, I think value read which is about to be overwritten by a commit is
possible. I think only pessimistic repeatable read tx can protect you
against that. Also, it seems there are no difference between read from one
node and read from several nodes here.

In primary_sync mode primaries send finish response immediately after
processing finish request. Prepare step is synchronous (successful
completion of one, btw, ensures that TX will be committed in any case). For
FULL_SYNC primary nodes wait for all backups and near readers to respond to
finish and then send finish responses back to near node.

--Yakov

2017-02-08 11:23 GMT+07:00 Valentin Kulichenko <
valentin.kulichenko@gmail.com>:

> Folks,
>
> I've got couple of questions about transactional behavior in Ignite that I
> want to clarify.
>
> 1. With READ_COMMITTED isolation, do I have atomicity guarantee when
> reading multiple values? For example, first transaction commits keys
> [1,2,3,4,5], while another does getAll([2,4]). Is it possible to get
> committed value for 2 and an old one for 4, or vice versa? Is there a
> difference between a distributed transaction and transaction colocated to a
> single node?
>
> 2.  What are the semantics of PRIMARY_SYNC in transactional cache? Is there
> a difference in guarantees between PRIMARY_SYNC and FULL_SYNC?
>
> Thanks!
>
> -Val
>

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