ignite-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Valentin Kulichenko <valentin.kuliche...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: IGNITE-4188, savepoints with atomic cache?
Date Tue, 28 Mar 2017 18:22:07 GMT
I actually think exception makes sense here. Currently it's very error
prone - the same code can behave differently depending on configuration.
And at the same time I can't imagine a use case which implies using atomic
operation within a transaction on purpose. If someone ever does this, it
would most likely be done by mistake.

-Val

On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 10:13 AM, Denis Magda <dmagda@apache.org> wrote:

> Yakov,
>
> My vote goes for the current behavior - an atomic operation is applied
> right away if it’s a part of a transaction. It’s better not to break
> compatibility here, there are already to many incompatible changes in 2.0.
>
> —
> Denis
>
> > On Mar 28, 2017, at 3:08 AM, Yakov Zhdanov <yzhdanov@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > As far as I know operations on atomic caches are applied immediately
> > dishonoring any tx context.
> >
> > I would suggest that atomic cache update operation called from active tx
> > throws illegal state exception, unless user intentionally permits this
> > update by calling atomicCache.withAllowInTx() (similar to
> withSkipStore()).
> >
> > Thoughts?
> >
> > --Yakov
>
>

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