Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

HHH-10023 Make hibernate-infinispan compiled with Infinispan 7.x but … #1045

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

rvansa
Copy link
Contributor

@rvansa rvansa commented Aug 6, 2015

…runnable with Infinispan 8.x

https://hibernate.atlassian.net/browse/HHH-10023

There are two tests failing yet because of https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-5605 - that should be fixed in Infinispan upstream.

@rvansa
Copy link
Contributor Author

rvansa commented Aug 6, 2015

Pushed again, those two failures masked that I haven't fixed two keySet() usages

…runnable with Infinispan 8.x

* workaround for ISPN-5676
* fix for ClassCastException in ClusteredTimestampsRegionImpl
* minor fixes in the testsuite
@rvansa
Copy link
Contributor Author

rvansa commented Aug 13, 2015

I've found ISPN-5676 - the PR now contains a workaround for that (+ few other fixes).

@@ -291,6 +291,10 @@ public static void removeAll(AdvancedCache cache) {
}

public static CollectableCloseableIterable keys(AdvancedCache cache) {
if (cache.getCacheConfiguration().transaction().transactionMode().isTransactional()) {
// Dummy read to enlist the LocalTransaction as workaround for ISPN-5676
cache.containsKey(false);
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Wondering maybe you want to do a withFlags(CACHE_MODE_LOCAL) ? So this way if it is distributed you won't incur the remote overhead.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Good point. @rvansa I'll integrate this PR asap but can you make sure this gets addressed later on?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Also this will be fixed in ISPN 7.2.5 which will render this change unneeded. But I am not for sure when that will be released.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think that in all places where I use this, local cache is passed to the method. I don't think that the additional flag should be passed at this place (which is some kind of generic helper on Cache API).

@galderz
Copy link
Member

galderz commented Aug 20, 2015

Integrated, thanks @rvansa. Remember to address the optimisation suggested by @wburns.

@galderz galderz closed this Aug 20, 2015
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
3 participants