Mailing-List: contact dev-help@jackrabbit.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@jackrabbit.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of stefan.guggisberg@gmail.com
 designates 209.85.161.170 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <4ED7806E.5010402@apache.org>
References: <CAFBF1F9.98931%aklimets@adobe.com>
	<4ED63BEE.6010904@apache.org>
	<CAOFYJNYedNnWA4Z_NWAuGaJBEuav87fY330NXfKAf7_Apx-ruw@mail.gmail.com>
	<4ED751DC.8070606@apache.org>
	<CAOFYJNaN8=EH6bGTWNyB5SctqV+UaQA5LeEAuCH+S=etw1yM8A@mail.gmail.com>
	<4ED76F55.3030001@apache.org>
	<CAOFYJNZvN3xPm9kYg37oTjJ+bQerd9JQn_hzuj1PyqiHQRDxkg@mail.gmail.com>
	<4ED7806E.5010402@apache.org>
Date: Thu, 1 Dec 2011 14:35:16 +0100
Message-ID: 
 <CAFYk8N=moDYmvSOkj+zqBX=7W7_8U7+9W32YDv1qpBkMSRCbWQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [jr3 microkernel] Write skew
From: Stefan Guggisberg <stefan.guggisberg@gmail.com>
To: dev@jackrabbit.apache.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Thu, Dec 1, 2011 at 2:26 PM, Michael D=FCrig <mduerig@apache.org> wrote:
>
> On 1.12.11 13:01, Jukka Zitting wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Thu, Dec 1, 2011 at 1:13 PM, Michael D=FCrig<mduerig@apache.org> =A0w=
rote:
>>>
>>> But this will introduce a race condition. With other words: this only
>>> make
>>> the time window during which such a inconsistency could slip in smaller=
.
>>> I
>>> think what we'd really need is an atomic test and set operation.
>>
>>
>> Right, either the refresh-check-persist model for save() needs to be
>> atomic (possibly with optimistic locking as described) or we need an
>> eventual consistency model that can automatically resolve such
>> conflicts.
>>
>> Has this already been thought about? How does the current microkernel
>> implementation handle such cases?
>
>
> Currently the microkernel does nothing about this. That's what this whole
> discussion is about after all ;-)

and please bear in mind that the microkernel project in the jackrabbit sand=
box
is a prototype and represents WIP... ;)

cheers
stefan


>
> Eventually consistent approaches are IMO very hard to get right with JCR
> since most operation are assumed to be persisted after dispatch. One
> solution I see is to have changes caused by conflict resolution (i.e. dur=
ing
> convergence) to appear as normal changes as if they where done by other
> sessions (see [1]). This would however require changing the revision mode=
l
> of the microkernel from linear shaped to tree shaped.
>
> For the current problem I'd rather have the microkernel to expose some
> test-and-set semantics as Tom describes in [2]. That way a client of the
> microkernel could apply changes atomically.
>
> A third and most general solution which puts away with write skew for goo=
d
> is described in [3]. This requires examining the commit log for certain
> read-write conflicts on save.
>
> Michael
>
> [1]
> http://wiki.apache.org/jackrabbit/Clustering%20the%20Microkernel#Replicat=
ion
>
> [2] http://markmail.org/message/c32jpeoxklgcrybr
>
> [3] http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=3D1376690