Mailing-List: contact issues-help@ignite.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@ignite.apache.org
Date: Tue, 23 May 2017 06:48:04 +0000 (UTC)
From: "Semen Boikov (JIRA)" <jira@apache.org>
To: issues@ignite.apache.org
Message-ID: <JIRA.12977604.1465564919000.269592.1495522084344@Atlassian.JIRA>
In-Reply-To: <JIRA.12977604.1465564919000@Atlassian.JIRA>
References: <JIRA.12977604.1465564919000@Atlassian.JIRA> <JIRA.12977604.1465564919038@jira-lw-us.apache.org>
Subject: [jira] [Updated] (IGNITE-3299) Cache remove can be lost in ATOMIC
 cache with OFFHEAP_TIERED memory mode
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
archived-at: Tue, 23 May 2017 06:48:09 -0000


     [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-3299?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ]

Semen Boikov updated IGNITE-3299:
---------------------------------
    Fix Version/s:     (was: 2.1)
                   2.2

> Cache remove can be lost in ATOMIC cache with OFFHEAP_TIERED memory mode
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: IGNITE-3299
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-3299
>             Project: Ignite
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: cache
>            Reporter: Semen Boikov
>            Assignee: Semen Boikov
>             Fix For: 2.2
>
>
> Added test reproducing issue (IgniteCacheConcurrentPutGetRemove).
> 1. There is an issue with 'deferredDelete' implementation - entry marked as 'deleted' can be evicted from cache, after this information about remove is lost (note: this can be reproduced not only in OFFHEAP_TIERED, but also in ONHEAP_TIERED mode with eviction policy, also this can also cause lost update in transactional cache on changing topology).
> 2. Looks like condition for removing from offheap in GridCacheMapEntry.innerUpdate is not correct:
> {noformat}
>             if (op != GridCacheOperation.UPDATE && cctx.offheapTiered() && hasValPtr) {
>                 boolean rmv = cctx.swap().removeOffheap(key);
> {noformat}
> It is possible that value was put in offheap, but 'hasValPtr' is false.


--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)