Bug 847062 - Pre-Invocation flag PUT_FOR_EXTERNAL_READ throws exception
Summary: Pre-Invocation flag PUT_FOR_EXTERNAL_READ throws exception
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED UPSTREAM
Alias: None
Product: JBoss Data Grid 6
Classification: JBoss
Component: Infinispan
Version: 6.0.1
Hardware: Unspecified
OS: Unspecified
unspecified
unspecified
Target Milestone: ER6
: 6.1.0
Assignee: Tristan Tarrant
QA Contact: Martin Gencur
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2012-08-09 14:52 UTC by Anna Manukyan
Modified: 2025-02-10 03:20 UTC (History)
2 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2025-02-10 03:20:29 UTC
Type: Bug
Embargoed:


Attachments (Terms of Use)


Links
System ID Private Priority Status Summary Last Updated
Red Hat Issue Tracker ISPN-2187 0 Major Resolved Pre-Invocation flag PUT_FOR_EXTERNAL_READ throws exception 2013-03-20 03:15:48 UTC

Description Anna Manukyan 2012-08-09 14:52:29 UTC

Comment 1 JBoss JIRA Server 2012-08-14 08:46:28 UTC
Galder Zamarreño <galder.zamarreno> updated the status of jira ISPN-2187 to Resolved

Comment 2 JBoss JIRA Server 2012-08-14 08:46:28 UTC
Galder Zamarreño <galder.zamarreno> made a comment on jira ISPN-2187

I think you're confusing two things here:

1. The putForExternalRead() operation

2. The PUT_FOR_EXTERNAL_READ flag.

The second is simply used internally to do some optimisations when we're executing an PFER operation. If you really want a put() op to behave like PFER, you need to pass all this flags:

https://github.com/infinispan/infinispan/blob/master/core/src/main/java/org/infinispan/CacheImpl.java#L356

Comment 3 JBoss JIRA Server 2012-08-14 08:52:20 UTC
Martin Gencur <mgencur> made a comment on jira ISPN-2187

Galder, we should change the JavaDoc in such a case. Currently it says this:
{code:java}
 /**
    * Flags the invocation as a {@link Cache#putForExternalRead(Object, Object)} call, as opposed to a regular
    * {@link Cache#put(Object, Object)}.
    */
   PUT_FOR_EXTERNAL_READ,
{code}

We should be more precise here as users cannot be sure how it exactly works (I was confused too).

Comment 4 JBoss JIRA Server 2012-08-14 12:04:44 UTC
Galder Zamarreño <galder.zamarreno> made a comment on jira ISPN-2187

I've changed the javadoc so that users realise this is an internal flag and they should not use it. It will be refactored in the future.

Comment 5 JBoss JIRA Server 2012-08-14 12:06:56 UTC
Galder Zamarreño <galder.zamarreno> updated the status of jira ISPN-2187 to Reopened

Comment 6 JBoss JIRA Server 2012-08-14 12:32:45 UTC
Martin Gencur <mgencur> made a comment on jira ISPN-2187

Thanks Galder:)

Comment 7 mark yarborough 2012-08-15 13:23:44 UTC
Clarify if this should be included in JDG 6.0.1 versus 6.1. (The jira was target for ISPN 5.2 as of 15-Aug)

Comment 9 Martin Gencur 2012-09-12 07:37:11 UTC
Shouldn't we close this as WONTFIX? AFAIK, this was just badly documented flag. It should not be used by normal users, this is an internal flag. This was fixed in Infinspan by modifying the javadoc for this flag. Or are we planning to close this once the proper javadoc is backported to JDG?

Comment 10 mark yarborough 2012-11-14 14:42:17 UTC
ttarrant will add jira links as appropriate.

Comment 13 Red Hat Bugzilla 2025-02-10 03:20:29 UTC
This product has been discontinued or is no longer tracked in Red Hat Bugzilla.


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.