On Wed, Nov 4, 2015 at 4:39 AM, Alexey Goncharuk <[email protected] > wrote:
> I am not sure what behavior we want to achieve here. Do we want to > disable cache peer class loading for binary marshaling altogether? > This restriction is safe to remove only if user chooses to work exclusively > with Binary object representation. > Alexey, yes, you are right. Currently we have a restriction for PRIVATE or ISOLATED deployment modes in caches. I am suggesting we should remove this restriction and add a warning in the log about using only Binary representation. > If user still wants to work with class object representation, SHARED > or CONTINUOUS deployment mode is still a requirement for the same reasons > it was a requirement before. > Agree. > > 2015-11-04 11:48 GMT+03:00 Dmitriy Setrakyan <[email protected]>: > > > Igniters, > > > > I want to bring your attention to my email response on the user list. I > > just want to confirm that we are all on the same page and that my > > understanding is correct. > > > > I think that once we merge the BinaryObject to the release branch, we > > should remove the restriction on SHARED or CONTINUOUS deployment modes in > > cache, assuming that our own Binary marshaling is used. > > > > Alexey G, given that you are in charge of this merge, can you please make > > this change as well? > > > > Thanks, > > D. > > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > > From: Dmitriy Setrakyan <[email protected]> > > Date: Tue, Nov 3, 2015 at 11:13 AM > > Subject: Re: Distributed queue problem with peerClassLoading enabled > > To: user <[email protected]> > > > > > > Hi Mateusz, > > > > In the upcoming Ignite 1.5 release, we will not be storing user-classes > on > > the server side at all, so the need for deployment of enqueued objects > goes > > away. > > > > With that in mind, we will be removing the requirement for caches to work > > only with SHARED and CONTINUOUS deployment modes, so you will be able to > > use PRIVATE or ISOLATED deployment modes to deploy your computations. > > > > We are currently actively working on finalizing the 1.5 release, so it > > should be coming real soon. > > > > D. > > > > On Tue, Nov 3, 2015 at 3:05 AM, mp <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Hi Denis, > > > > > > Thanks a lot for the clarifications. > > > > > > So, is there any way in Ignite to achieve my goal: different versions > of > > > the same class running on the cluster (they can be deployed at the same > > > time from different client nodes)? > > > If yes, I can think of a way in which I can achieve my goals without > > using > > > the distributed queue. > > > > > > Cheers, > > > -Mateusz > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Nov 3, 2015 at 11:53 AM, Denis Magda <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > >> Hi Mateusz, > > >> > > >> Unfortunately I don't see any way to specify userVersion > > programmatically. > > >> In any case CONTINIOUS and SHARED mode is not suitable for your task > > >> because > > >> the developers may want to have different version of the same class. > > >> Please > > >> refer to DeploymentMode documentation for more info on different mode > > >> types. > > >> > > >> Do you really need to use IgniteQueue in your tests because, yes, > > neither > > >> PRIVATE nor ISOLATED modes are supported for user caches. > > >> > > >> -- > > >> Denis > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> -- > > >> View this message in context: > > >> > > > http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/Distributed-queue-problem-with-peerClassLoading-enabled-tp1762p1820.html > > >> Sent from the Apache Ignite Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > > >> > > > > > > > > >
