ignite-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Alexey Kuznetsov <akuznet...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Ignite: configuration changes at runtime
Date Tue, 22 Aug 2017 01:20:38 GMT
Guys,

Why not to let user to decide whether to persist changed properties or not?
We could have a Boolean flag on API "persist=true|false".

Make sense?

On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 6:52 AM, Dmitriy Setrakyan <dsetrakyan@apache.org>
wrote:

> On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 7:28 AM, Alexey Dmitriev <admitriev@gridgain.com>
> wrote:
>
> > I believe it should be persistent.
> > We can have a parameter about "reset configuration on restart", which can
> > be also OLCC-compatible
> >
>
> Alexey, the problem with persisting at all times is that some properties
> may be set directly from code. What is wrong with persisting when user
> explicitly calls saveToFile method?
>
>
> >
> > On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 5:22 PM, Dmitriy Setrakyan <
> dsetrakyan@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 7:15 AM, Alexey Dmitriev <
> admitriev@gridgain.com
> > >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > I would say it should as soon as we moving to "persistence".
> > > > It will require to look at the things a bit different than before,
> but
> > I
> > > > would say that's an evolution for the product.
> > > > We probably also should think how our configuration system should be
> > > > changed to make it more obvious.
> > > >
> > >
> > > But in that case, what to do with XML configuration? Should it be
> updated
> > > as well? Or even worse, what if user added configuration from code?
> > >
> > > On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 5:11 PM, Dmitriy Setrakyan <
> > dsetrakyan@apache.org>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > I think the main question I have is whether this configuration
> change
> > > > will
> > > > > survive restarts. Part of me says it should, and the other part
> says
> > it
> > > > > shouldn't.
> > > > >
> > > > > Does anyone have a strong opinion about this?
> > > > >
> > > > > D.
> > > > >
> > > > > On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 7:07 AM, Alexey Dmitriev <
> > > admitriev@gridgain.com
> > > > >
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > It looks like very useful and natural thing having the parameters
> > > > change
> > > > > on
> > > > > > the fly.
> > > > > > Maybe we should design something like OLCC (on-line configuration
> > > > change)
> > > > > > module, which will request different procedures for different
> bunch
> > > of
> > > > > > parameters.
> > > > > > All the parameters, this way, will be splitted into several
> groups.
> > > > > > For example in the worst case, when all the grid has to be
> > > synchronized
> > > > > for
> > > > > > particular parameter change, some preparation on the grid has
to
> be
> > > > > > performed, than when all the nodes reports readiness, the
> parameter
> > > > > change
> > > > > > could be initiated.
> > > > > > On the opposite if it is parameter configured per node, OLCC
> state
> > > > > machine
> > > > > > will work simpler without inter-node communication.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 4:21 PM, Yakov Zhdanov <
> > yzhdanov@apache.org>
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > >I see your point. In this case, we should have a special
> package
> > > > > > > containing
> > > > > > > >all the runtime config properties.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Dmitry, I think this will be a mess.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Igniters, any more opinions?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --Yakov
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > Alexey Dmitriev, VP Engineering
> > > > > > *GridGain Systems*
> > > > > > www.gridgain.com
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Alexey Dmitriev, VP Engineering
> > > > *GridGain Systems*
> > > > www.gridgain.com
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Alexey Dmitriev, VP Engineering
> > *GridGain Systems*
> > www.gridgain.com
> >
>



-- 
Alexey Kuznetsov

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