Skip to content

IGNITE-26060 FailureHandler isn't called on TX coordinator node in certain scenarios#12825

Open
zstan wants to merge 2 commits intoapache:masterfrom
zstan:ignite-26060
Open

IGNITE-26060 FailureHandler isn't called on TX coordinator node in certain scenarios#12825
zstan wants to merge 2 commits intoapache:masterfrom
zstan:ignite-26060

Conversation

@zstan
Copy link
Contributor

@zstan zstan commented Feb 26, 2026

@zstan zstan changed the title Ignite 26060 IGNITE-26060 FailureHandler isn't called on TX coordinator node in certain scenarios Feb 26, 2026
@zstan zstan marked this pull request as ready for review February 26, 2026 15:13
@zstan zstan force-pushed the ignite-26060 branch 3 times, most recently from 8f8a37f to ad32dfd Compare February 26, 2026 15:52

/** {@inheritDoc} */
@Override public boolean storeWriteThrough(GridCacheSharedContext sctx) {
if (storeWriteThrough != null)
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Do we actually need to optimize this part? Method's call tree makes me thinking that the method is called once on each node during execution of a specific part of tx's handling procedure.

If this is true we don't need this additional logic.

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 made simple thing:
just write naive log here : System.err.println("!! storeWriteThrough " + hashCode());
run TxWithExceptionalInterceptorTest#testTxWithExceptionInterceptor
and found numerous of occurence with equal hash code, thus i suppose it helpful

.count() == 1);
}
else
waitForTopology(2);
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Can we add some additional checks here to examine dead and alive nodes? Like it is done in then branch with check for client node.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

done, thanks !

@sonarqubecloud
Copy link

sonarqubecloud bot commented Mar 3, 2026

Quality Gate Failed Quality Gate failed

Failed conditions
8 New Code Smells (required ≤ 1)

See analysis details on SonarQube Cloud

Catch issues before they fail your Quality Gate with our IDE extension SonarQube for IDE

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants