Hi Veena, As far as I know, CQ listeners should not be notified about non-committed writes. I suppose that it is possible to reproduce a described scenario, what does it show in practice?
Also it is important to know that all participating caches should be TRANSACTIONAL and "update of cache b fails" possibly does not mean that a transaction is rolled back. 2020-10-17 14:28 GMT+03:00, VeenaMithare <v.mith...@cmcmarkets.com>: > Hello team, > > This is in continuation to these posts on the ignite users > > http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/Continuous-query-not-transactional-td34270.html > and > http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/Lag-before-records-are-visible-after-transaction-commit-tp33787p33861.html > > Does this mean we could get dirty reads as updates in continuous query ? > i.e. for eg if the code is as below: > 1. Start transaction > 2. update records of cache a > 3. update records of cache b > 4. update records for cache c > 5. commit > > if update of cache a succeeds , but update of cache b fails, will the local > listener for continuous query for 'cache a' get an update ? > > regards, > Veena. > > > > > > -- > Sent from: http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/ > -- Best regards, Ivan Pavlukhin
