Bug 1024373
| Summary: | Default optimistic locking configuration leads to inconsistency | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [JBoss] JBoss Data Grid 6 | Reporter: | Martin Gencur <mgencur> |
| Component: | Infinispan | Assignee: | Tristan Tarrant <ttarrant> |
| Status: | CLOSED UPSTREAM | QA Contact: | Martin Gencur <mgencur> |
| Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
| Priority: | unspecified | ||
| Version: | 6.2.0 | CC: | chuffman, jdg-bugs |
| Target Milestone: | --- | ||
| Target Release: | 7.0.0 | ||
| Hardware: | Unspecified | ||
| OS: | Unspecified | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Known Issue | |
| Doc Text: |
In Red Hat JBoss Data Grid, transactional caches are configured with optimistic locking by default. Concurrent <methodname>replace()</methodname> calls can return true under contention and transactions might unexpectedly commit.
Two concurrent commands, <command>replace(key, A, B)</command> and <command>replace(key, A, C)</command> may both overwrite the entry. The command which is finalized later wins, overwriting an unexpected value with new value.
This is a known issue in JBoss Data Grid 6.4. As a workaround, enable write skew check and the <parameter>REPEATABLE_READ</parameter> isolation level. This results in concurrent replace operations working as expected.
|
Story Points: | --- |
| Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
| Last Closed: | 2025-02-10 03:28:50 UTC | Type: | Bug |
| Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
| Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
| Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
| oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
| Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
| Embargoed: | |||
|
Description
Martin Gencur
2013-10-29 14:29:13 UTC
Hi Misha, this should be documented in release notes. Users should know that the default configuration has changed. Added the flag. Gemma will develop this release note for the GA Release Notes as a resolved issue. In the meantime, if someone can point us to a JIRA that tracked this issue originally or add some CCFR information about this issue, it would be very helpful. *** Bug 1026221 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** Galder Zamarreño <galder.zamarreno> made a comment on jira ISPN-3655 Deferred to 7.0 This was scheduled for 7.0.0 and so it can't be a blocker for JDG 6.2. Removing this flag. This issue should be documented in release notes for JDG 6.2.GA as a known issue. This product has been discontinued or is no longer tracked in Red Hat Bugzilla. |