Hi, Dmitriy, null Grid name and null Igfs name mean the default Grid and Igfs respectively. In case of in-process connection, URI without specified grid and/or igfs name means to connect to the default (null-named) Grid and/or Igfs. If this contract makes sense, we should not prohibit nulls.
On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 9:11 PM, Dmitriy Setrakyan <dsetrak...@apache.org> wrote: > I also agree (I think). Would prohibiting nulls also make sense? > > On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 4:04 AM, Vladimir Ozerov <voze...@gridgain.com> > wrote: > > > +1 > > > > User should have minimal chance to do a mistake in common scenarios. > > > > On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 1:47 PM, Ivan V. <iveselovs...@gridgain.com> > > wrote: > > > > > Hi, dev, > > > currently IGFS URI has form > > > igfs://[igfs-name[:grid-name]]@[host[:port]]/[path] . > > > This connection can be established with "in-process" routine (used > mostly > > > in tests), or with SHMEM, or with TCP protocol. > > > Current logic of "igfs-name" and "grid-name" handling is as follows. > > > In case of in-proc routine the Ignite process is asked for named Grid > and > > > its IGFS, null names mean default instances. > > > In case of external process connection (to "host:port" specified in the > > > URI) there is a restriction that the name of connected IGFS and Grid > must > > > exactly match "igfs-name" and "grid-name" specified in the URI. But > that > > > rule leads to the following (may be unexpected) behavior: if URI is > > > "igfs://localhost:10500/", the IGFS name and Grid names are null-s, and > > the > > > name match rule requires the connected IGFS and Grid to be default. And > > if > > > that is not the case, an exception is thrown. This situation has > happened > > > with a user, and described in > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-1566 . > > > In order to fix the problem and improve the usability, I would suggest > to > > > relax the name handling logic in the following way: in case of external > > > connection treat unspecified Igfs and Grid names as a direction to > > connect > > > to the Grid/Igfs that owns the connection port (not more than one such > > pair > > > exists). > > > Any objections, corrections, thoughts? > > > Thanks in advance. > > > > > >
