Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-ignite-user-archive@minotaur.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-ignite-user-archive@minotaur.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 05DE41847E for ; Fri, 19 Feb 2016 10:01:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 72954 invoked by uid 500); 19 Feb 2016 10:01:15 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-ignite-user-archive@ignite.apache.org Received: (qmail 72914 invoked by uid 500); 19 Feb 2016 10:01:15 -0000 Mailing-List: contact user-help@ignite.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: user@ignite.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list user@ignite.apache.org Received: (qmail 72904 invoked by uid 99); 19 Feb 2016 10:01:15 -0000 Received: from pnap-us-west-generic-nat.apache.org (HELO spamd1-us-west.apache.org) (209.188.14.142) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 19 Feb 2016 10:01:15 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by spamd1-us-west.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at spamd1-us-west.apache.org) with ESMTP id 0EEE6C3148 for ; Fri, 19 Feb 2016 10:01:15 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at spamd1-us-west.apache.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 2.652 X-Spam-Level: ** X-Spam-Status: No, score=2.652 tagged_above=-999 required=6.31 tests=[HTML_MESSAGE=2, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_NEUTRAL=0.652] autolearn=disabled Received: from mx2-lw-eu.apache.org ([10.40.0.8]) by localhost (spamd1-us-west.apache.org [10.40.0.7]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 1aN4iisA9IST for ; Fri, 19 Feb 2016 10:01:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mbob.nabble.com (mbob.nabble.com [162.253.133.15]) by mx2-lw-eu.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at mx2-lw-eu.apache.org) with ESMTP id 75F655F1D5 for ; Fri, 19 Feb 2016 10:01:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: from malf.nabble.com (unknown [162.253.133.59]) by mbob.nabble.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3680C2114BDB for ; Fri, 19 Feb 2016 01:54:18 -0800 (PST) Date: Fri, 19 Feb 2016 01:49:10 -0800 (PST) From: kwon To: user@ignite.apache.org Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: <1455872977861-3092.post@n6.nabble.com> Subject: Re: Can I use Backup Node Instead Primary Node On Partitioned Cache MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_104930_1597427391.1455875350463" ------=_Part_104930_1597427391.1455875350463 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Thank you very much! 2016-02-19 18:33 GMT+09:00 yakov [via Apache Ignite Users] < ml-node+s70518n3094h72@n6.nabble.com>: > Hello! > > Please see > org.apache.ignite.configuration.CacheConfiguration#isReadFromBackup which > is true by default. So, if backup is local and rebalancing has finished a= nd > no persistent store configured then no network calls should be done. I > think the latest changes to this logic have not been released yet, but th= ey > will be in 1.6. For now you can build from master. > > --Yakov > > 2016-02-19 12:09 GMT+03:00 kwon <[hidden email] > >: > >> Hi, All. >> >> I have some question about get data with specific key from backup node >> instead of primary node on partitioned cache for performance. >> >> more specifically, >> if local client that reside same JVM with partion1 find some specific ke= y >> for partition2 , >> and partion2's backup partition is reside partition1's JVM, >> then is it possible that get value from partion2's backup partition >> instead >> of get from primary partition to avoid additional workload(like network)= ? >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> View this message in context: >> http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/Can-I-use-Backup-Node-Ins= tead-Primary-Node-On-Partitioned-Cache-tp3092.html >> Sent from the Apache Ignite Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >> > > > > ------------------------------ > If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the discussion > below: > > http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/Can-I-use-Backup-Node-Inst= ead-Primary-Node-On-Partitioned-Cache-tp3092p3094.html > To unsubscribe from Can I use Backup Node Instead Primary Node On > Partitioned Cache, click here > > . > NAML > > --=20 ------------------------------ *=E6=AC=8A =E4=B8=BB=E6=83=A0 - KWON JUHYE* =E9=96=8B=E7=99=BA=E9=83=A8 ------------------------------ =E3=80=92150-0013 =E6=9D=B1=E4=BA=AC=E9=83=BD=E6=B8=8B=E8=B0=B7=E5=8C=BA=E6=81=B5=E6=AF=94=E5= =AF=BF4-9-10 tel 03-5793-3731 | fax 03-5793-3732 web | map | email -- View this message in context: http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.co= m/Can-I-use-Backup-Node-Instead-Primary-Node-On-Partitioned-Cache-tp3092p30= 96.html Sent from the Apache Ignite Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ------=_Part_104930_1597427391.1455875350463 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Thank you very much!

<= div class=3D"gmail_quote">2016-02-19 18:33 GMT+09:00 yakov [via Apache Igni= te Users] <[hidd= en email]>:
=09
Hello!

Please see org.apa= che.ignite.configuration.CacheConfiguration#isReadFromBackup which is true = by default. So, if backup is local and rebalancing has finished and no pers= istent store configured then no network calls should be done. I think the l= atest changes to this logic have not been released yet, but they will be in= 1.6. For now you can build from master.

--Yakov

2016-02-19 12:09 GMT+03:00 kwon <[hidden em= ail]>:
Hi, All.

I have some question about get data with specific key from backup node
instead of primary node on partitioned cache for performance.

more specifically,
if local client that reside same JVM with partion1 find some specific key for partition2 ,
and partion2's backup partition is reside partition1's JVM,
then is it possible that get value from partion2's backup partition ins= tead
of get from primary partition to avoid additional workload(like network)?




--
View this message in context: http://= apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/Can-I-use-Backup-Node-Instead-Prima= ry-Node-On-Partitioned-Cache-tp3092.html
Sent from the Apache Ignite Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

=09 =09 =09 =09
=09
=09
=09
=09=09
If you reply to this email, your mess= age will be added to the discussion below:
=09=09http://apache-ignite-users= .70518.x6.nabble.com/Can-I-use-Backup-Node-Instead-Primary-Node-On-Partitio= ned-Cache-tp3092p3094.html =09
=09
=09=09 =09=09To unsubscribe from Can I use Backup Node Instead Primary Node On Par= titioned Cache, click here.
=09=09NAML =09



--
=E6=AC=8A=E3=80=80=E4=B8=BB=E6=83=A0=C2=A0- = KWON JUHYE
=E9=96=8B=E7=99=BA=E9=83=A8

=E3=80=92150-0013=E3=80=80
=E6=9D=B1=E4=BA= =AC=E9=83=BD=E6=B8=8B=E8=B0=B7=E5=8C=BA=E6=81=B5=E6=AF=94=E5=AF=BF4-9-10tel =C2=A003-5793-3731=C2=A0|=C2= =A0fax =C2=A003-5793-3732
web=C2=A0=C2=A0|=C2=A0=C2=A0= map=C2=A0=C2=A0|=C2=A0= =C2=A0[hidden email]=C2=A0 =C2= =A0
=09 =09 =09
View this message in context: Re: Can I use Backup Node Instead Primary Node On Parti= tioned Cache
Sent from the A= pache Ignite Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
------=_Part_104930_1597427391.1455875350463--