ignite-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Pavel Tupitsyn <ptupit...@apache.org>
Subject Re: IgniteConfiguration.gridName is very confusing
Date Fri, 05 Aug 2016 08:53:08 GMT
We keep getting a steady stream of users confused by gridName :)

https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-3207 seems to be abandoned,
should we unassign it?

Pavel.

On Fri, May 27, 2016 at 8:10 PM, Dmitriy Setrakyan <dsetrakyan@apache.org>
wrote:

> Great! I think I like “instanceName” better, just in case if this name will
> be provided for information purposes on other nodes.
>
> D.
>
> On Fri, May 27, 2016 at 2:29 AM, Pavel Tupitsyn <ptupitsyn@gridgain.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Done: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-3207
> >
> > I have stated "localInstanceName" there, because "instanceName" may not
> be
> > clear enough.
> >
> > Pavel.
> >
> > On Fri, May 27, 2016 at 12:19 PM, Dmitriy Setrakyan <
> dsetrakyan@apache.org
> > >
> > wrote:
> >
> > > I like the change, as long as we do not remove, but *deprecate* the
> > > gridName property and update all the documentation and examples.
> > >
> > > Pavel, can you please file a ticket?
> > >
> > > D.
> > >
> > > On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 1:56 AM, Pavel Tupitsyn <
> ptupitsyn@gridgain.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Igniters,
> > > >
> > > > We have got a TON of questions on gridName property. Everyone thinks
> > that
> > > > clusters are formed based on the gridName, that is, nodes with the
> same
> > > > grid name will join one cluster, and nodes with a different name will
> > be
> > > in
> > > > a separate cluster.
> > > >
> > > > I suggest to deprecate this property and add instanceName instead.
> > > >
> > > > Thoughts?
> > > >
> > > > Pavel.
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message