Uploaded image for project: 'Infinispan'
  1. Infinispan
  2. ISPN-4995

ClusteredGet served for non-member of CH

    Details

      Description

      When nodes accept ClusteredGetCommand from node that is not member of CH, it can happen that when one thread does

      put(K1, V1);
      put(K2, V2)
      

      and another gets

      get(K2) -> V2
      get(K1) -> V0 (some old value)
      

      edg-perf01, 02 and 03 share this view and topology:

      04:40:08,714 TRACE [org.jgroups.protocols.FD_SOCK] (INT-8,edg-perf01-63779) edg-perf01-63779: i-have-sock: edg-perf02-45117 --> 172.18.1.3:37476 (cache is {edg-perf01-63779=172.18.1.1:40099, edg-perf02-45117=172.18.1.3:37476})
      04:40:08,715 TRACE [org.infinispan.topology.ClusterTopologyManagerImpl] (transport-thread--p2-t6) Received new cluster view: 8, isCoordinator = true, becameCoordinator = false
      04:40:11,203 DEBUG [org.infinispan.topology.LocalTopologyManagerImpl] (transport-thread--p2-t1) Updating local consistent hash(es) for cache testCache: new topology = CacheTopology{id=16, rebalanceId=4, currentC
      H=DefaultConsistentHash{ns = 512, owners = (3)[edg-perf02-45117: 171+170, edg-perf03-6264: 171+171, edg-perf01-63779: 170+171]}, pendingCH=null, unionCH=null, actualMembers=[edg-perf02-45117, edg-perf03-6264, edg-perf01-63779]}
      

      Later, edg-perf02 and edg-perf03 get new view and install a new topology, where edg-perf01 does not exist:

      04:41:13,681 INFO [org.infinispan.remoting.transport.jgroups.JGroupsTransport] (Incoming-2,edg-perf03-6264) ISPN000093: Received new, MERGED cluster view for channel default: MergeView::[edg-perf02-45117|9] (3) [edg-perf02-45117, edg-perf03-6264, edg-perf04-10989], 1 subgroups: [edg-perf04-10989|7] (1) [edg-perf04-10989]
      04:41:13,681 TRACE [org.infinispan.topology.ClusterTopologyManagerImpl] (transport-thread--p2-t22) Received new cluster view: 9, isCoordinator = false, becameCoordinator = false
      04:41:13,760 TRACE [org.infinispan.remoting.transport.jgroups.CommandAwareRpcDispatcher] (remote-thread--p3-t32) Attempting to execute non-CacheRpcCommand command: CacheTopologyControlCommand{cache=testCache, type=CH_UPDATE, sender=edg-perf02-45117, joinInfo=null, topologyId=18, rebalanceId=4, currentCH=DefaultConsistentHash{ns = 512, owners = (2)[edg-perf02-45117: 256+85, edg-perf03-6264: 256+86]}, pendingCH=null, availabilityMode=AVAILABLE, actualMembers=[edg-perf02-45117, edg-perf03-6264], throwable=null, viewId=9}[sender=edg-perf02-45117]
      

      After that, edg-perf04 writes to key_00000000000020DB which is currently owned only by edg-perf03 - this key servers as K1 in example above. It is not backed up to edg-perf01, but edg-perf01 still thinks it's an owner of this key as it did not get any new view (this is a log from edg-perf03) :

      04:41:30,884 TRACE [org.infinispan.remoting.rpc.RpcManagerImpl] (remote-thread--p3-t45) edg-perf03-6264 invoking PutKeyValueCommand{key=key_00000000000020DB, value=[33 #4: 0, 169, 284, 634, ], flags=[SKIP_CACHE_LOAD, SKIP_REMOTE_LOOKUP], putIfAbsent=false, valueMatcher=MATCH_ALWAYS,  metadata=EmbeddedMetadata{version=null}, successful=true} to recipient list [edg-perf03-6264] with options RpcOptions{timeout=60000, unit=MILLISECONDS, fifoOrder=true, totalOrder=false, responseFilter=null, responseMode=SYNCHRONOUS, skipReplicationQueue=false}
      

      Later, edg-perf04 writes to another key stressor_33 (K2 in the example) value with operationId=650 (previous value is 600) which is replicated to edg-perf02 and edg-perf03.

      Now a merge view with all 4 nodes is installed:

      04:41:31,258 INFO  [org.infinispan.remoting.transport.jgroups.JGroupsTransport] (Incoming-2,edg-perf01-63779) ISPN000093: Received new, MERGED cluster view for channel default: MergeView::[edg-perf01-63779|10] (4) [edg-perf01-63779, edg-perf03-6264, edg-perf02-45117, edg-perf04-10989], 6 subgroups: [edg-perf02-45117|7] (2) [edg-perf02-45117, edg-perf03-6264], [edg-perf01-63779|4] (2) [edg-perf01-63779, edg-perf02-45117], [edg-perf02-45117|9] (3) [edg-perf02-45117, edg-perf03-6264, edg-perf04-10989], [edg-perf03-6264|4] (2) [edg-perf03-6264, edg-perf04-10989], [edg-perf01-63779|8] (3) [edg-perf01-63779, edg-perf02-45117, edg-perf03-6264], [edg-perf01-63779|6] (1) [edg-perf01-63779]
      04:41:31,258 TRACE [org.infinispan.topology.ClusterTopologyManagerImpl] (transport-thread--p2-t2) Received new cluster view: 10, isCoordinator = true, becameCoordinator = false
      

      edg-perf01 now issues a remote get to edg-perf02 for key stressor_33 and receives the correct answer (operationId=650):

      04:41:32,494 TRACE [org.infinispan.remoting.rpc.RpcManagerImpl] (BackgroundOps-Checker-1) Response(s) to ClusteredGetCommand{key=stressor_33, flags=null} is {edg-perf02-45117=SuccessfulResponse{responseValue=ImmortalCacheValue {value=LastOperation{operationId=650, seed=0000A15A4C2DD25A}}} }
      

      However, when edg-perf01 reads key_00000000000020DB, it loads the old value from local data container as no CH update/rebalance happened so far:

      04:41:32,496 TRACE [org.infinispan.partitionhandling.impl.PartitionHandlingManagerImpl] (BackgroundOps-Checker-1) Checking availability for key=key_00000000000020DB, status=AVAILABLE
      04:41:32,497 ERROR [org.radargun.stages.cache.background.LogChecker] (BackgroundOps-Checker-1) Missing operation 634 for thread 33 on key 8411 (key_00000000000020DB) 
      04:41:32,499 DEBUG [org.radargun.service.InfinispanDebugable] (BackgroundOps-Checker-1) Debug info for key testCache key_00000000000020DB: owners=edg-perf01-63779, edg-perf03-6264, local=true, uncertain=false, container.key_00000000000020DB=ImmortalCacheEntry[key=key_00000000000020DB, value=[33 #3: 0, 169, 284, ], created=-1, isCreated=false, lastUsed=-1, isChanged=false, expires=-1, isExpired=false, canExpire=false, isEvicted=true, isRemoved=false, isValid=false, lifespan=-1, maxIdle=-1], segmentId=173
      

      Note that this was found on branch https://github.com/infinispan/infinispan/pull/3062/files trying to fix ISPN-4949.

        Gliffy Diagrams

          Attachments

            Issue Links

              Activity

                People

                • Assignee:
                  dan.berindei Dan Berindei
                  Reporter:
                  rvansa Radim Vansa
                • Votes:
                  0 Vote for this issue
                  Watchers:
                  6 Start watching this issue

                  Dates

                  • Created:
                    Updated:
                    Resolved: