Refactor code in order to seperate all classes in single files instead of using nested classes. #2

hazelcast · 2012-03-23T21:00:51Z

What steps will reproduce the problem?

Many classes used in Hazelcast are nested in other classes.

What is the expected output? What do you see instead?
Each class should have its own file. If classes are related to one super
class, create a new sub-package.

Please use labels and text to provide additional information.
This is only for coding style, but makes the source files much smaller and
easier to read.

Migrated from http://code.google.com/p/hazelcast/issues/detail?id=79

earlier comments

john.channing said, at 2009-06-05T21:41:00.000Z:

I agree. Currently there are some *very* large classes which are making the code difficult to understand and test.

oztalip said, at 2009-12-03T11:30:58.000Z:

We are not there yet but we are certainly making progress as classes like CMap, Record, MapMigrator are taken out of ConcurrentMapManager. I agree with the fact that ConcurrentMapManager is still huge.

nguba@rivet-studios.com said, at 2011-12-20T10:41:28.000Z:

I am not sure that readability is that much an issue. Testing however, is a big one. The better a projects supports testing (TDD) the better I like it :)

mdogan · 2013-08-21T09:45:30Z

Code completely refactored in 3.0

Set version to 3.6-HEP2-SNAPSHOT to avoid conflicts

Consider the following scenarios where client1 and client2 run on different threads: SCENARIO hazelcast#1: - STEP 1: client1.lock(); Lock is acquired by client1. - STEP 2: client2.lock(); Wait key is added to the lock for client2. After some time, client2.lock() call fails with operation timeout - STEP3: client2.unlock(); Fails with IllegalMonitorStateException because client2 is not holder of the lock. However, its wait key is still present. So the lock will be assigned to client2 when client1 releases it. SCENARIO hazelcast#2: - STEP 1: client1.lock(); Lock is acquired by client1. - STEP 2: client2.lock(); Wait key is added to the lock for client2. After some time, client2.lock() call fails with operation timeout - STEP 3: client2.lock(); A new wait key is added to the lock for client2, because its second lock() call has a new invocation uuid. - STEP 4: client1.unlock(); The lock will be assigned to client2 for its first lock() call. Now the lock is held by client2 and its lock count is just 1. However, nothing will be done for its other wait key in the list. - STEP 5: client2.unlock(); Client2 releases the lock, but since it has another wait key in the list, it will get the lock again. We need two separate fixes to resolve these issues. First, unlock() call should cancel all pending wait keys of the lock endpoint, if the lock is not currently held by itself. Second, if a lock() call is received while there is another wait key by the same client, the first lock() call must be cancelled via deleting its wait key from the wait list of the lock.

# This is the 1st commit message: HD SQL: integrate concurrent off-heap B+tree index into the old query engine * Introduced a global system property to enable global HD indexes; * Introduced a new HDOrderedConcurrentIndexStore (based on BPlusTree) for global HD indexes support; * Fallback to the old partitioned HD index if the global indices are disabled for HD. Closes https://github.com/hazelcast/hazelcast-enterprise/issues/3652 # This is the commit message #2: Disabled global lock for on-heap indexes Otherwise the updates are not atomic

Use SRV lookups for DNS resolving

External client manual

Initial implementation of Hazelcast GCP Plugin

SPI Should not report deallocated VMs

Document Azure Configuration and Mention Template

WAN historically has problems when connecting to target endpoints that are defined by hostnames and not IPs. This fix aims to provide a fix for that. The current behavior -------------------- The initator member establishes a connection to the target by using the known hostname instead of using the IP for the reasons like the hostname is the configured one and the users expect to see that in the logs etc. During establishing the connection, the source registers the new connection as in progress, with the configured hostname. If the target responds with an IP in the handshake response, the source can't find the address in its in progress connection list and drops the handshake response, despite the handshake in fact was successful. The proposed change ------------------- Since the handshake is successful in this case, we have a mapping problem only. This change solves it by registering the in-progress connection with all of the addresses that it resolve, which are: - `host`: the configured host or IP - `canonicalHost`: the hostname `host` is resolved to - `ip`: the resolved IP address of `host` These - at most - three addresses are all registered and linked together, treating `host` as the primary one. When processing the handshake, the below address lookup algorithm is followed where `remoteAddress` is the address from the handshake response of the target: ``` if remoteAddress is registered as in-progress then if remoteAddress is registered as primary then return remoteAddress for linkedAddress in remoteAddress.linkedAddresses if linkedAddress is registered as in-progress and it is primary then return linkedAddress // we return the configured host here return null ``` With this algorithm we can mark the in-progress connection as connected and WAN replication can start operating. Limitation of the proposal -------------------------- This proposal does not work if the target responds with an address that can't be resolved to with the configured hostname on the source side. Alternative option ------------------ Instead of connecting with the hostname, we can use the IP always. But that would lead to harder to read configuration and it also can't be used for DNS-based balancing (resolving the same hostname to different IPs at different times). Alternative option hazelcast#2 --------------------- We can register in-progress connections with a UUID and make that UUID part of the handshake request and response. It requires more changes though and most probably it incurs compatibility problems.

Fixes: #24424 Fixes: https://hazelcast.atlassian.net/browse/HZ-2391 Throws `SilentException` from `TaskletExecutionService to avoid duplicated error logs` Breaking changes (list specific methods/types/messages): * API * client protocol format * serialized form * snapshot format Checklist: - [x] Labels (`Team:`, `Type:`, `Source:`, `Module:`) and Milestone set - [x] Label `Add to Release Notes` or `Not Release Notes content` set - [x] Request reviewers if possible - [x] Send backports/forwardports if fix needs to be applied to past/future releases - [x] New public APIs have `@Nonnull/@Nullable` annotations - [x] New public APIs have `@since` tags in Javadoc - Before: ``` 13:22:16,136 INFO || - [TaskletExecutionService] hz.InsertJdbcSqlConnectorTest_upbeat_johnson.jet.blocking.thread-0 - [127.0.0.1]:5701 [dev] [5.3.0-SNAPSHOT] Exception in ProcessorTasklet{09d4-4eb6-8787-0001/Insert([table_o_f5aba5fe_3c5a_42b1_8976_7c5710d7e806])#0} com.hazelcast.jet.JetException: org.h2.jdbc.JdbcBatchUpdateException: Unique index or primary key violation: "PRIMARY KEY ON PUBLIC.table_o_f5aba5fe_3c5a_42b1_8976_7c5710d7e806(id) ( /* key:0 */ 0, 'name-0')"; SQL statement: INSERT INTO "table_o_f5aba5fe_3c5a_42b1_8976_7c5710d7e806" ( "id","name" ) VALUES (?, ?) [23505-214] at com.hazelcast.jet.impl.util.ExceptionUtil.peeledAndUnchecked(ExceptionUtil.java:142) ~[classes/:?] at com.hazelcast.jet.impl.util.ExceptionUtil.rethrow(ExceptionUtil.java:153) ~[classes/:?] at com.hazelcast.jet.impl.connector.WriteJdbcP.process(WriteJdbcP.java:234) ~[classes/:?] at com.hazelcast.jet.impl.execution.ProcessorTasklet.lambda$processInbox$2f647568$2(ProcessorTasklet.java:490) ~[classes/:?] at com.hazelcast.jet.function.RunnableEx.run(RunnableEx.java:31) ~[classes/:?] at com.hazelcast.jet.impl.util.Util.doWithClassLoader(Util.java:533) ~[classes/:?] at com.hazelcast.jet.impl.execution.ProcessorTasklet.processInbox(ProcessorTasklet.java:490) ~[classes/:?] at com.hazelcast.jet.impl.execution.ProcessorTasklet.stateMachineStep(ProcessorTasklet.java:341) ~[classes/:?] at com.hazelcast.jet.impl.execution.ProcessorTasklet.stateMachineStep(ProcessorTasklet.java:336) ~[classes/:?] at com.hazelcast.jet.impl.execution.ProcessorTasklet.stateMachineStep(ProcessorTasklet.java:328) ~[classes/:?] at com.hazelcast.jet.impl.execution.ProcessorTasklet.call(ProcessorTasklet.java:291) ~[classes/:?] at com.hazelcast.jet.impl.execution.TaskletExecutionService$BlockingWorker.run(TaskletExecutionService.java:315) [classes/:?] at java.util.concurrent.Executors$RunnableAdapter.call(Executors.java:539) [?:?] at java.util.concurrent.FutureTask.run(FutureTask.java:264) [?:?] at java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor.runWorker(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:1136) [?:?] at java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker.run(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:635) [?:?] at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:833) [?:?] Caused by: org.h2.jdbc.JdbcBatchUpdateException: Unique index or primary key violation: "PRIMARY KEY ON PUBLIC.table_o_f5aba5fe_3c5a_42b1_8976_7c5710d7e806(id) ( /* key:0 */ 0, 'name-0')"; SQL statement: INSERT INTO "table_o_f5aba5fe_3c5a_42b1_8976_7c5710d7e806" ( "id","name" ) VALUES (?, ?) [23505-214] at org.h2.jdbc.JdbcPreparedStatement.executeBatch(JdbcPreparedStatement.java:1269) ~[h2-2.1.214.jar:2.1.214] at com.zaxxer.hikari.pool.ProxyStatement.executeBatch(ProxyStatement.java:127) ~[HikariCP-4.0.3.jar:?] at com.zaxxer.hikari.pool.HikariProxyPreparedStatement.executeBatch(HikariProxyPreparedStatement.java) ~[HikariCP-4.0.3.jar:?] at com.hazelcast.jet.impl.connector.WriteJdbcP.executeBatch(WriteJdbcP.java:315) ~[classes/:?] at com.hazelcast.jet.impl.connector.WriteJdbcP.process(WriteJdbcP.java:220) ~[classes/:?] ... 14 more 13:22:16,140 ERROR || - [InitExecutionOperation] hz.InsertJdbcSqlConnectorTest_upbeat_johnson.cached.thread-1 - [127.0.0.1]:5701 [dev] [5.3.0-SNAPSHOT] Exception in ProcessorTasklet{09d4-4eb6-8787-0001/Insert([table_o_f5aba5fe_3c5a_42b1_8976_7c5710d7e806])#0}: com.hazelcast.jet.JetException: org.h2.jdbc.JdbcBatchUpdateException: Unique index or primary key violation: "PRIMARY KEY ON PUBLIC.table_o_f5aba5fe_3c5a_42b1_8976_7c5710d7e806(id) ( /* key:0 */ 0, 'name-0')"; SQL statement: INSERT INTO "table_o_f5aba5fe_3c5a_42b1_8976_7c5710d7e806" ( "id","name" ) VALUES (?, ?) [23505-214] com.hazelcast.jet.JetException: Exception in ProcessorTasklet{09d4-4eb6-8787-0001/Insert([table_o_f5aba5fe_3c5a_42b1_8976_7c5710d7e806])#0}: com.hazelcast.jet.JetException: org.h2.jdbc.JdbcBatchUpdateException: Unique index or primary key violation: "PRIMARY KEY ON PUBLIC.table_o_f5aba5fe_3c5a_42b1_8976_7c5710d7e806(id) ( /* key:0 */ 0, 'name-0')"; SQL statement: INSERT INTO "table_o_f5aba5fe_3c5a_42b1_8976_7c5710d7e806" ( "id","name" ) VALUES (?, ?) [23505-214] at com.hazelcast.jet.impl.execution.TaskletExecutionService.handleTaskletExecutionError(TaskletExecutionService.java:286) ~[classes/:?] at com.hazelcast.jet.impl.execution.TaskletExecutionService.access$600(TaskletExecutionService.java:80) ~[classes/:?] at com.hazelcast.jet.impl.execution.TaskletExecutionService$BlockingWorker.run(TaskletExecutionService.java:325) ~[classes/:?] at java.util.concurrent.Executors$RunnableAdapter.call(Executors.java:539) ~[?:?] at java.util.concurrent.FutureTask.run(FutureTask.java:264) ~[?:?] at java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor.runWorker(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:1136) ~[?:?] at java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker.run(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:635) ~[?:?] at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:833) ~[?:?] Caused by: com.hazelcast.jet.JetException: org.h2.jdbc.JdbcBatchUpdateException: Unique index or primary key violation: "PRIMARY KEY ON PUBLIC.table_o_f5aba5fe_3c5a_42b1_8976_7c5710d7e806(id) ( /* key:0 */ 0, 'name-0')"; SQL statement: INSERT INTO "table_o_f5aba5fe_3c5a_42b1_8976_7c5710d7e806" ( "id","name" ) VALUES (?, ?) [23505-214] at com.hazelcast.jet.impl.util.ExceptionUtil.peeledAndUnchecked(ExceptionUtil.java:142) ~[classes/:?] at com.hazelcast.jet.impl.util.ExceptionUtil.rethrow(ExceptionUtil.java:153) ~[classes/:?] at com.hazelcast.jet.impl.connector.WriteJdbcP.process(WriteJdbcP.java:234) ~[classes/:?] at com.hazelcast.jet.impl.execution.ProcessorTasklet.lambda$processInbox$2f647568$2(ProcessorTasklet.java:490) ~[classes/:?] at com.hazelcast.jet.function.RunnableEx.run(RunnableEx.java:31) ~[classes/:?] at com.hazelcast.jet.impl.util.Util.doWithClassLoader(Util.java:533) ~[classes/:?] at com.hazelcast.jet.impl.execution.ProcessorTasklet.processInbox(ProcessorTasklet.java:490) ~[classes/:?] at com.hazelcast.jet.impl.execution.ProcessorTasklet.stateMachineStep(ProcessorTasklet.java:341) ~[classes/:?] at com.hazelcast.jet.impl.execution.ProcessorTasklet.stateMachineStep(ProcessorTasklet.java:336) ~[classes/:?] at com.hazelcast.jet.impl.execution.ProcessorTasklet.stateMachineStep(ProcessorTasklet.java:328) ~[classes/:?] at com.hazelcast.jet.impl.execution.ProcessorTasklet.call(ProcessorTasklet.java:291) ~[classes/:?] at com.hazelcast.jet.impl.execution.TaskletExecutionService$BlockingWorker.run(TaskletExecutionService.java:315) ~[classes/:?] ... 5 more Caused by: org.h2.jdbc.JdbcBatchUpdateException: Unique index or primary key violation: "PRIMARY KEY ON PUBLIC.table_o_f5aba5fe_3c5a_42b1_8976_7c5710d7e806(id) ( /* key:0 */ 0, 'name-0')"; SQL statement: INSERT INTO "table_o_f5aba5fe_3c5a_42b1_8976_7c5710d7e806" ( "id","name" ) VALUES (?, ?) [23505-214] at org.h2.jdbc.JdbcPreparedStatement.executeBatch(JdbcPreparedStatement.java:1269) ~[h2-2.1.214.jar:2.1.214] at com.zaxxer.hikari.pool.ProxyStatement.executeBatch(ProxyStatement.java:127) ~[HikariCP-4.0.3.jar:?] at com.zaxxer.hikari.pool.HikariProxyPreparedStatement.executeBatch(HikariProxyPreparedStatement.java) ~[HikariCP-4.0.3.jar:?] at com.hazelcast.jet.impl.connector.WriteJdbcP.executeBatch(WriteJdbcP.java:315) ~[classes/:?] at com.hazelcast.jet.impl.connector.WriteJdbcP.process(WriteJdbcP.java:220) ~[classes/:?] at com.hazelcast.jet.impl.execution.ProcessorTasklet.lambda$processInbox$2f647568$2(ProcessorTasklet.java:490) ~[classes/:?] at com.hazelcast.jet.function.RunnableEx.run(RunnableEx.java:31) ~[classes/:?] at com.hazelcast.jet.impl.util.Util.doWithClassLoader(Util.java:533) ~[classes/:?] at com.hazelcast.jet.impl.execution.ProcessorTasklet.processInbox(ProcessorTasklet.java:490) ~[classes/:?] at com.hazelcast.jet.impl.execution.ProcessorTasklet.stateMachineStep(ProcessorTasklet.java:341) ~[classes/:?] at com.hazelcast.jet.impl.execution.ProcessorTasklet.stateMachineStep(ProcessorTasklet.java:336) ~[classes/:?] at com.hazelcast.jet.impl.execution.ProcessorTasklet.stateMachineStep(ProcessorTasklet.java:328) ~[classes/:?] at com.hazelcast.jet.impl.execution.ProcessorTasklet.call(ProcessorTasklet.java:291) ~[classes/:?] at com.hazelcast.jet.impl.execution.TaskletExecutionService$BlockingWorker.run(TaskletExecutionService.java:315) ~[classes/:?] ... 5 more 13:22:16,142 ERROR || - [SubmitJobOperation] hz.InsertJdbcSqlConnectorTest_upbeat_johnson.cached.thread-1 - [127.0.0.1]:5701 [dev] [5.3.0-SNAPSHOT] Execution on a member failed: com.hazelcast.jet.JetException: Exception in ProcessorTasklet{09d4-4eb6-8787-0001/Insert([table_o_f5aba5fe_3c5a_42b1_8976_7c5710d7e806])#0}: com.hazelcast.jet.JetException: org.h2.jdbc.JdbcBatchUpdateException: Unique index or primary key violation: "PRIMARY KEY ON PUBLIC.table_o_f5aba5fe_3c5a_42b1_8976_7c5710d7e806(id) ( /* key:0 */ 0, 'name-0')"; SQL statement: INSERT INTO "table_o_f5aba5fe_3c5a_42b1_8976_7c5710d7e806" ( "id","name" ) VALUES (?, ?) [23505-214] com.hazelcast.jet.JetException: Execution on a member failed: com.hazelcast.jet.JetException: Exception in ProcessorTasklet{09d4-4eb6-8787-0001/Insert([table_o_f5aba5fe_3c5a_42b1_8976_7c5710d7e806])#0}: com.hazelcast.jet.JetException: org.h2.jdbc.JdbcBatchUpdateException: Unique index or primary key violation: "PRIMARY KEY ON PUBLIC.table_o_f5aba5fe_3c5a_42b1_8976_7c5710d7e806(id) ( /* key:0 */ 0, 'name-0')"; SQL statement: INSERT INTO "table_o_f5aba5fe_3c5a_42b1_8976_7c5710d7e806" ( "id","name" ) VALUES (?, ?) [23505-214] at com.hazelcast.jet.impl.LightMasterContext.findError(LightMasterContext.java:326) ~[classes/:?] at com.hazelcast.jet.impl.LightMasterContext.lambda$createContext$2(LightMasterContext.java:171) ~[classes/:?] at com.hazelcast.jet.impl.LightMasterContext.lambda$invokeOnParticipant$8(LightMasterContext.java:297) ~[classes/:?] at com.hazelcast.spi.impl.AbstractInvocationFuture$WhenCompleteNode.lambda$execute$0(AbstractInvocationFuture.java:1570) ~[classes/:?] at com.hazelcast.test.TestLoggingUtils$CustomTestNameAwareForkJoinPool$TestNameAwareRunnable.run(TestLoggingUtils.java:104) ~[test-classes/:?] at java.util.concurrent.ForkJoinTask$RunnableExecuteAction.exec(ForkJoinTask.java:1395) ~[?:?] at java.util.concurrent.ForkJoinTask.doExec(ForkJoinTask.java:373) ~[?:?] at java.util.concurrent.ForkJoinPool$WorkQueue.topLevelExec(ForkJoinPool.java:1182) ~[?:?] at java.util.concurrent.ForkJoinPool.scan(ForkJoinPool.java:1655) ~[?:?] at java.util.concurrent.ForkJoinPool.runWorker(ForkJoinPool.java:1622) ~[?:?] at java.util.concurrent.ForkJoinWorkerThread.run(ForkJoinWorkerThread.java:165) ~[?:?] Caused by: com.hazelcast.jet.JetException: Exception in ProcessorTasklet{09d4-4eb6-8787-0001/Insert([table_o_f5aba5fe_3c5a_42b1_8976_7c5710d7e806])#0}: com.hazelcast.jet.JetException: org.h2.jdbc.JdbcBatchUpdateException: Unique index or primary key violation: "PRIMARY KEY ON PUBLIC.table_o_f5aba5fe_3c5a_42b1_8976_7c5710d7e806(id) ( /* key:0 */ 0, 'name-0')"; SQL statement: INSERT INTO "table_o_f5aba5fe_3c5a_42b1_8976_7c5710d7e806" ( "id","name" ) VALUES (?, ?) [23505-214] at com.hazelcast.jet.impl.execution.TaskletExecutionService.handleTaskletExecutionError(TaskletExecutionService.java:286) ~[classes/:?] at com.hazelcast.jet.impl.execution.TaskletExecutionService.access$600(TaskletExecutionService.java:80) ~[classes/:?] at com.hazelcast.jet.impl.execution.TaskletExecutionService$BlockingWorker.run(TaskletExecutionService.java:325) ~[classes/:?] at java.util.concurrent.Executors$RunnableAdapter.call(Executors.java:539) ~[?:?] at java.util.concurrent.FutureTask.run(FutureTask.java:264) ~[?:?] at java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor.runWorker(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:1136) ~[?:?] at java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker.run(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:635) ~[?:?] at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:833) ~[?:?] Caused by: com.hazelcast.jet.JetException: org.h2.jdbc.JdbcBatchUpdateException: Unique index or primary key violation: "PRIMARY KEY ON PUBLIC.table_o_f5aba5fe_3c5a_42b1_8976_7c5710d7e806(id) ( /* key:0 */ 0, 'name-0')"; SQL statement: INSERT INTO "table_o_f5aba5fe_3c5a_42b1_8976_7c5710d7e806" ( "id","name" ) VALUES (?, ?) [23505-214] at com.hazelcast.jet.impl.util.ExceptionUtil.peeledAndUnchecked(ExceptionUtil.java:142) ~[classes/:?] at com.hazelcast.jet.impl.util.ExceptionUtil.rethrow(ExceptionUtil.java:153) ~[classes/:?] at com.hazelcast.jet.impl.connector.WriteJdbcP.process(WriteJdbcP.java:234) ~[classes/:?] at com.hazelcast.jet.impl.execution.ProcessorTasklet.lambda$processInbox$2f647568$2(ProcessorTasklet.java:490) ~[classes/:?] at com.hazelcast.jet.function.RunnableEx.run(RunnableEx.java:31) ~[classes/:?] at com.hazelcast.jet.impl.util.Util.doWithClassLoader(Util.java:533) ~[classes/:?] at com.hazelcast.jet.impl.execution.ProcessorTasklet.processInbox(ProcessorTasklet.java:490) ~[classes/:?] at com.hazelcast.jet.impl.execution.ProcessorTasklet.stateMachineStep(ProcessorTasklet.java:341) ~[classes/:?] at com.hazelcast.jet.impl.execution.ProcessorTasklet.stateMachineStep(ProcessorTasklet.java:336) ~[classes/:?] at com.hazelcast.jet.impl.execution.ProcessorTasklet.stateMachineStep(ProcessorTasklet.java:328) ~[classes/:?] at com.hazelcast.jet.impl.execution.ProcessorTasklet.call(ProcessorTasklet.java:291) ~[classes/:?] at com.hazelcast.jet.impl.execution.TaskletExecutionService$BlockingWorker.run(TaskletExecutionService.java:315) ~[classes/:?] at java.util.concurrent.Executors$RunnableAdapter.call(Executors.java:539) ~[?:?] at java.util.concurrent.FutureTask.run(FutureTask.java:264) ~[?:?] at java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor.runWorker(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:1136) ~[?:?] at java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker.run(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:635) ~[?:?] at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:833) ~[?:?] Caused by: org.h2.jdbc.JdbcBatchUpdateException: Unique index or primary key violation: "PRIMARY KEY ON PUBLIC.table_o_f5aba5fe_3c5a_42b1_8976_7c5710d7e806(id) ( /* key:0 */ 0, 'name-0')"; SQL statement: INSERT INTO "table_o_f5aba5fe_3c5a_42b1_8976_7c5710d7e806" ( "id","name" ) VALUES (?, ?) [23505-214] at org.h2.jdbc.JdbcPreparedStatement.executeBatch(JdbcPreparedStatement.java:1269) ~[h2-2.1.214.jar:2.1.214] at com.zaxxer.hikari.pool.ProxyStatement.executeBatch(ProxyStatement.java:127) ~[HikariCP-4.0.3.jar:?] at com.zaxxer.hikari.pool.HikariProxyPreparedStatement.executeBatch(HikariProxyPreparedStatement.java) ~[HikariCP-4.0.3.jar:?] at com.hazelcast.jet.impl.connector.WriteJdbcP.executeBatch(WriteJdbcP.java:315) ~[classes/:?] at com.hazelcast.jet.impl.connector.WriteJdbcP.process(WriteJdbcP.java:220) ~[classes/:?] at com.hazelcast.jet.impl.execution.ProcessorTasklet.lambda$processInbox$2f647568$2(ProcessorTasklet.java:490) ~[classes/:?] at com.hazelcast.jet.function.RunnableEx.run(RunnableEx.java:31) ~[classes/:?] at com.hazelcast.jet.impl.util.Util.doWithClassLoader(Util.java:533) ~[classes/:?] at com.hazelcast.jet.impl.execution.ProcessorTasklet.processInbox(ProcessorTasklet.java:490) ~[classes/:?] at com.hazelcast.jet.impl.execution.ProcessorTasklet.stateMachineStep(ProcessorTasklet.java:341) ~[classes/:?] at com.hazelcast.jet.impl.execution.ProcessorTasklet.stateMachineStep(ProcessorTasklet.java:336) ~[classes/:?] at com.hazelcast.jet.impl.execution.ProcessorTasklet.stateMachineStep(ProcessorTasklet.java:328) ~[classes/:?] at com.hazelcast.jet.impl.execution.ProcessorTasklet.call(ProcessorTasklet.java:291) ~[classes/:?] at com.hazelcast.jet.impl.execution.TaskletExecutionService$BlockingWorker.run(TaskletExecutionService.java:315) ~[classes/:?] at java.util.concurrent.Executors$RunnableAdapter.call(Executors.java:539) ~[?:?] at java.util.concurrent.FutureTask.run(FutureTask.java:264) ~[?:?] at java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor.runWorker(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:1136) ~[?:?] at java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker.run(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:635) ~[?:?] at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:833) ~[?:?] ``` - After: ``` 13:21:10,994 INFO || - [TaskletExecutionService] hz.InsertJdbcSqlConnectorTest_objective_dirac.jet.blocking.thread-1 - [127.0.0.1]:5702 [dev] [5.3.0-SNAPSHOT] Exception in ProcessorTasklet{09d4-4e76-e106-0001/Insert([table_o_53a507a3_f770_434d_973c_cbc523ca0f89])#2} com.hazelcast.jet.JetException: org.h2.jdbc.JdbcBatchUpdateException: Unique index or primary key violation: "PRIMARY KEY ON PUBLIC.table_o_53a507a3_f770_434d_973c_cbc523ca0f89(id) ( /* key:0 */ 0, 'name-0')"; SQL statement: INSERT INTO "table_o_53a507a3_f770_434d_973c_cbc523ca0f89" ( "id","name" ) VALUES (?, ?) [23505-214] at com.hazelcast.jet.impl.util.ExceptionUtil.peeledAndUnchecked(ExceptionUtil.java:142) ~[classes/:?] at com.hazelcast.jet.impl.util.ExceptionUtil.rethrow(ExceptionUtil.java:153) ~[classes/:?] at com.hazelcast.jet.impl.connector.WriteJdbcP.process(WriteJdbcP.java:234) ~[classes/:?] at com.hazelcast.jet.impl.execution.ProcessorTasklet.lambda$processInbox$2f647568$2(ProcessorTasklet.java:490) ~[classes/:?] at com.hazelcast.jet.function.RunnableEx.run(RunnableEx.java:31) ~[classes/:?] at com.hazelcast.jet.impl.util.Util.doWithClassLoader(Util.java:533) ~[classes/:?] at com.hazelcast.jet.impl.execution.ProcessorTasklet.processInbox(ProcessorTasklet.java:490) ~[classes/:?] at com.hazelcast.jet.impl.execution.ProcessorTasklet.stateMachineStep(ProcessorTasklet.java:341) ~[classes/:?] at com.hazelcast.jet.impl.execution.ProcessorTasklet.stateMachineStep(ProcessorTasklet.java:336) ~[classes/:?] at com.hazelcast.jet.impl.execution.ProcessorTasklet.stateMachineStep(ProcessorTasklet.java:328) ~[classes/:?] at com.hazelcast.jet.impl.execution.ProcessorTasklet.call(ProcessorTasklet.java:291) ~[classes/:?] at com.hazelcast.jet.impl.execution.TaskletExecutionService$BlockingWorker.run(TaskletExecutionService.java:314) [classes/:?] at java.util.concurrent.Executors$RunnableAdapter.call(Executors.java:539) [?:?] at java.util.concurrent.FutureTask.run(FutureTask.java:264) [?:?] at java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor.runWorker(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:1136) [?:?] at java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker.run(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:635) [?:?] at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:833) [?:?] Caused by: org.h2.jdbc.JdbcBatchUpdateException: Unique index or primary key violation: "PRIMARY KEY ON PUBLIC.table_o_53a507a3_f770_434d_973c_cbc523ca0f89(id) ( /* key:0 */ 0, 'name-0')"; SQL statement: INSERT INTO "table_o_53a507a3_f770_434d_973c_cbc523ca0f89" ( "id","name" ) VALUES (?, ?) [23505-214] at org.h2.jdbc.JdbcPreparedStatement.executeBatch(JdbcPreparedStatement.java:1269) ~[h2-2.1.214.jar:2.1.214] at com.zaxxer.hikari.pool.ProxyStatement.executeBatch(ProxyStatement.java:127) ~[HikariCP-4.0.3.jar:?] at com.zaxxer.hikari.pool.HikariProxyPreparedStatement.executeBatch(HikariProxyPreparedStatement.java) ~[HikariCP-4.0.3.jar:?] at com.hazelcast.jet.impl.connector.WriteJdbcP.executeBatch(WriteJdbcP.java:315) ~[classes/:?] at com.hazelcast.jet.impl.connector.WriteJdbcP.process(WriteJdbcP.java:220) ~[classes/:?] ... 14 more ``` --------- Co-authored-by: František Hartman <frant.hartm@gmail.com>

hazelcast mentioned this issue Mar 23, 2012

storing evicted/deleted elements to a MapStore - Why? #96

Closed

Tembrel mentioned this issue May 25, 2012

Add suport for map of maps similar to MultiMap #147

Closed

PavelR577 mentioned this issue Aug 13, 2012

hibernate query cache not cleared when using setParametersList #238

Closed

bacalv mentioned this issue Apr 3, 2013

Too much cpu used when Hazelcast is idle #81

Closed

mdogan added a commit that referenced this issue May 7, 2013

[WIP] - Binary client continues... #2

732770f

mdogan closed this as completed Aug 21, 2013

Danny-Hazelcast mentioned this issue Jul 11, 2014

3.2.4 - Stabilizer tests Final profile, Xlarge cluster OperationTimeoutException #2999

Closed

pmioulet mentioned this issue Jul 24, 2014

Spring cache client configuration issue #3072

Closed

sathyashree mentioned this issue Aug 4, 2014

java.io.EOFException[Could not read protocol type!] #3116

Closed

ChristerF mentioned this issue Aug 15, 2014

Adding functionality to serialize maps and collections directly from Por... #3231

Closed

pveentjer referenced this issue Mar 4, 2015

Fixed checkstyle/findbugs issues.

2f1b355

pveentjer mentioned this issue Mar 28, 2015

Deadmans switch redesign #4931

Closed

lburgazzoli pushed a commit to lburgazzoli/hazelcast that referenced this issue Jul 2, 2015

Merge pull request hazelcast#2 from lburgazzoli/discovery-spi

62e4474

Set version to 3.6-HEP2-SNAPSHOT to avoid conflicts

igmar mentioned this issue Jul 27, 2015

com.hazelcast.cluster.impl.TcpIpJoinerOverAWS Server returned HTTP response code: 401 for URL: https://ec2.amazonaws.com/?Action=DescribeInstances #5653

Closed

dmitrymz mentioned this issue Dec 6, 2016

[lock] [entry-processor] Transaction couldn't obtain lock for the key #9374

Closed

jerrinot mentioned this issue Jun 15, 2017

3.9-SNAPSHOT client received generic HazelcastException when cause was MemberLeftException #10763

Closed

wellprado mentioned this issue Jul 14, 2017

Hazelcast with tomcat parallel deploy - com.hazelcast.nio.serialization.HazelcastSerializationException: java.lang.ClassNotFoundException: org.springframework.security.web.csrf.DefaultCsrfToken #10925

Closed

pdca mentioned this issue Aug 24, 2016

latest hazelcast3.3.1 IMap query performance dropped double compare with hazelcast2.5 #3761

Closed

mzuberbhatuk mentioned this issue Dec 5, 2018

Add size(Predicate) to determine the size of predicate results #8555

Closed

jerrinot mentioned this issue Feb 21, 2019

hazelcast client java.lang.OutOfMemoryError: Java heap space #14540

Closed

jerrinot mentioned this issue Jan 2, 2020

Factory to populate Config object from well-known locations #16386

Closed

mmedenjak added the Source: Internal PR or issue was opened by an employee label Jan 28, 2020

viliam-durina mentioned this issue Jul 6, 2020

Add support for delivering of results of Jet queries to the client #17128

Merged

jerrinot mentioned this issue Aug 12, 2020

ReplicatedMap high memory consumption when replicating #17335

Closed

devozerov mentioned this issue Sep 17, 2020

Optimize SQL threading model #17563

Closed

SeriyBg referenced this issue in SeriyBg/hazelcast Jul 9, 2021

Merge pull request #2 from jimmidyson/srv-records

160b763

Use SRV lookups for DNS resolving

SeriyBg referenced this issue in SeriyBg/hazelcast Jul 9, 2021

Merge pull request #2 from leszko/external-client-manual

cd7ad95

External client manual

SeriyBg referenced this issue in SeriyBg/hazelcast Jul 9, 2021

Merge pull request #2 from leszko/gcp

18e17d2

Initial implementation of Hazelcast GCP Plugin

SeriyBg referenced this issue in SeriyBg/hazelcast Jul 9, 2021

Merge pull request #2 from sedouard/unit_tests

8aea15a

SPI Should not report deallocated VMs

SeriyBg referenced this issue in SeriyBg/hazelcast Jul 9, 2021

Merge pull request #2 from sedouard/doc_configuration

6593957

Document Azure Configuration and Mention Template

blazember mentioned this issue Oct 1, 2021

WAN target hostname fix #19684

Closed

6 tasks

yolshin mentioned this issue May 15, 2022

Lexicographically lesser node should initiate merge when not on member list[HZ-1035] #21418

Closed

6 tasks

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Refactor code in order to seperate all classes in single files instead of using nested classes. #2

Refactor code in order to seperate all classes in single files instead of using nested classes. #2

hazelcast commented Mar 23, 2012

mdogan commented Aug 21, 2013

Refactor code in order to seperate all classes in single files instead of using nested classes. #2

Refactor code in order to seperate all classes in single files instead of using nested classes. #2

Comments

hazelcast commented Mar 23, 2012

earlier comments

mdogan commented Aug 21, 2013