zookeeper-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Joe Gamache <gama...@cabotresearch.com>
Subject Re: Multi question on using previous ops results
Date Fri, 18 May 2012 15:43:06 GMT

I have looked at this in more detail.   I found this thread: 

which said: "Sample usage can be found in 

Using part of that code to illustrate.  What I would like to be able to 
do is something akin to:

       Integer REF1;
       Integer REF2;
       Integer REF3;
                 /* Create */
                 REF1 = Op.create("/multi", null, new byte[0], 
                 Op.setData("", REF1, "DATA_VALUE".getBytes(), 0),
                 REF2 = Op.create("/a", REF1, new byte[0], 
                 REF3 = Op.create("/1", REF2 new byte[0], 

Obviously, use of Integer is just for illustration and the CAPs are for 
effect.   However, with this type of API the "multi" implementation 
could, for a single input list, maintain a structure of previous Op's 
that could then be referred to in future ops.  When a "reference" was 
passed in that was non-null, it would just that reference in some 
intelligent way.   Above, the use of REF1 on the "setData" method would 
lookup the path created for REF1 and use that to set the data.  The use 
of REF1 in the Op.create would APPEND the input path to the path created 
for REF1.  Thus, the REF2 line might create a path like /multi_00000001/a

Ideally, I would like to be able to replace the "0" in various "setData" 
calls, not sure how to do that exactly, but the above would be a decent 
start.  [If a node already existed and I was calling the Op.setData 
method and wanted to follow that with a Op.check call, I believe that I 
currently have no way of knowing the version number....]

Does this make more sense than the gibberish I was trying below?



On 5/16/2012 8:06 PM, Joe Gamache wrote:
> No thought about two znodes being synchronized at all.
> The higher level intent of the first (code) example is: how do you get 
> the version number for a set operation and use that value in the set 
> atomically?  For the second one it is: how to I create and lock a 
> znode atomically?   [maybe the Lock znode is attached to the node I am 
> creating, maybe in another structure?  I don't really care, just can I 
> do it atomically?]
> Another way to do what I would like would be to create a znode 
> structure that is not "attached" to the existing one at all, then once 
> I have it the way it should be, attach it to an existing node.  
> However, I am quite certain this is not possible....
> On 5/16/2012 7:21 PM, Ted Dunning wrote:
>> It looks like you are assuming that the versions of two znodes are 
>> synchronized. That seems pretty dangerous.
>> What is the higher level intent here?  Would it better to simply 
>> build a multi to update both znodes?
>> Sent from my iPhone
>> On May 16, 2012, at 11:59 AM, Joe Gamache<gamache@cabotresearch.com>  
>> wrote:
>>> I need to do something like the following:
>>> Stat stats = nodeToSet.getStat();
>>> if (stats != null) {
>>>     int version = stats.getVersion();
>>>     stats = client.getZk().setData(path, data, version);
>>> (data was preset in code not shown).   Since I have multiple 
>>> processes all vying to do things, in the worst case (which happens 
>>> too frequently), two processes execute the above at basically the 
>>> same time, which causes errors.   I thought I might be able to use 
>>> Multi to do this atomically, but I cannot figure out how to use the 
>>> result (the version number above) from one Op in a later Op.  Is 
>>> this possible?
>>> This was the simplest example I could find, but this happens often - 
>>> usually with Paths.  For instance, sometimes I create a zookeeper 
>>> node and want a "LOCK" node underneath it.  If I follow the "recipe" 
>>> and use an ephemeral sequential node as the lock, how can I refer to 
>>> sequence in a Path in subsequent Op added to a "multi" or is there 
>>> any way to do it atomically?  Sorry that was so very wordy.  What I 
>>> was really trying to ask, is how do I create and lock a node 
>>> atomically?
>>> thanks for any help, insight!
>>> joe

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