ignite-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Kristian Rosenvold <krosenv...@apache.org>
Subject Re: State of initially started cache with CacheRebalanceMode.SYNC ?
Date Mon, 13 Jun 2016 07:59:48 GMT
This is a replicated cache and I see the unexpected behaviour with 2
nodes. All I'm trying to do is to make sure the newly started server
is not processing requests before its cache is fully populated. It
seems to me you're saying the "get" request will actually be served by
the other node before rebalancing is complete ?


2016-06-13 9:55 GMT+02:00 Denis Magda <dmagda@gridgain.com>:
> Kristian,
> How many nodes do you have in the cluster? If there are more than two server nodes then
there shouldn’t be any blocking because while rebalancing is happening on one node the other
node can accept and fulfill cache related operations. The main point is that the cluster won’t
stuck until data is being rebalanced on some node.
> —
> Denis
>> On Jun 13, 2016, at 10:51 AM, Kristian Rosenvold <krosenvold@apache.org> wrote:
>> 2016-06-13 9:14 GMT+02:00 Denis Magda <dmagda@gridgain.com>:
>>> This property means that a node that is being started and where a part of cache
data is being rebalanced won’t be considered for any cache related operations until the
rebalancing has finished.
>>> In my understanding such a node won’t be considered for cache operations like
put, get, etc. until all the data is fully rebalanced on it. However this doesn’t prevent
from getting a cache reference on this node and ask for current cache size.
>> Unfortunately it does not seem to work that way. I was also
>> considering that it might only apply to put/get operations, so I tried
>> adding a bogus "get" for a non-existing member to see if it would then
>> exhibit any kind of blocking behaviour (and hence make my assert pass
>> 100% of the time). This does not seem to be the case either. Running
>> an explicit rebalance seems to do the trick. This would appear to be a
>> bug unless I misunderstand something.
>> Kristian

View raw message