Thank you guys for quick feedback!

So I guess once this and the source code/SGA addressing concerns from Roman's
emails are available to all of us - we can reconvene for the constructive
discussion!

With regards,
  Cos

On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 04:46PM, Denis Magda wrote:
> >> 5. Can we have a discussion about the design of this new layer so people
> >> here
> >>   can understand better what's being offered, how to take the advantage of
> >>   it, and - most importantly - to offer their own insights and
> >> improvements
> >>   into this new subsystems before it's landed in the source code? And it
> >>   would safe a lot of time on Q&A as well.
> >> 
> > 
> > Yes, good idea. Denis, do you have a high level architecture for the
> > proposed persistence?
> 
> It will be prepared right after Apache Ignite 2.0 release. Presently, don’t
> have time to wrap it up in a doc form.
> 
> —
> Denis
> 
> > On Apr 18, 2017, at 10:44 PM, Dmitriy Setrakyan <[email protected]> 
> > wrote:
> > 
> > Cos, good questions! My answers are inline...
> > 
> > On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 4:17 PM, Konstantin Boudnik <[email protected]
> > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
> > 
> >> Great news indeed! Thanks for sharing!
> >> 
> >> Before we jump on the voting and all that, can we have a chance to learn
> >> more
> >> about this new feature and its integration points with the rest of the
> >> platform? A few questions come to mind immediately:
> >> 
> >> 1. This is an "optional disk layer", so it could be turned off
> >> _completely_ and
> >>   have no effect on those who don't want nor need to use it, right?
> >> 
> > 
> > Yes
> > 
> > 
> >> 2. Does it have any performance implications on the in-memory operations?
> >> 
> > 
> > No, as long as the persistence is turned off, the in-memory operations will
> > not be impacted.
> > 
> > 
> >> 3. When you say it is "fully ... ANSI-99 SQL compliant fault-tolerant"
> >> does it
> >>   mean that _all_ SQL operations are now now supported through SQL or
> >> still
> >>   some of them only available through the JAVA APIs? THe fault tolerance
> >> is
> >>   for the data-center only as before, right? No new WAN-able HA has been
> >>   introduced?
> >> 
> > 
> > Well... I would say most SQL operations are going to be supported,
> > including CREATE, DROP, INSERT, UPDATE, DELETE, SELECT, and of course,
> > distributed joins.
> > 
> > And yes, you are right about the fault tolerance.
> > 
> > 
> >> 4. With addition of this new model, are there any backward compatibility
> >>   issues that would affect Ignite's application developers?
> >> 
> > 
> > I don't think so. All incompatible changes should have been introduced in
> > 2.0. I will let other community members comment here...
> > 
> > 
> >> 5. Can we have a discussion about the design of this new layer so people
> >> here
> >>   can understand better what's being offered, how to take the advantage of
> >>   it, and - most importantly - to offer their own insights and
> >> improvements
> >>   into this new subsystems before it's landed in the source code? And it
> >>   would safe a lot of time on Q&A as well.
> >> 
> > 
> > Yes, good idea. Denis, do you have a high level architecture for the
> > proposed persistence?
> > 
> > 
> >> 
> >> I am confused a little bit by these two slightly controversial statements:
> >> - "GG... has been developing a unique distributed persistent store...for
> >> more
> >>  than a year in-house"
> >> - "we decided at GridGain that this tremendous feature should be open
> >> source
> >>  from the very beginning"
> >> 
> >> So, it sounds like the code has been under the development for a while and
> >> it
> >> isn't opened up "from the very beginning", unless there's a new meaning of
> >> the
> >> word beginning I am not aware of just yet :) It feels like this could be a
> >> significant amount of the code to be digested by the community.
> >> 
> > 
> > Yes, you are right. Many of us wanted to open source this functionality
> > from the get go. In any case, this makes a great addition to the project. I
> > hope we will be able to provide enough documentation and feedback on the
> > dev list to ease up the digestion process.
> > 
> > 
> >> 
> >> Appreciate your thoughts on this! Thanks,
> >>  Cos
> >> 
> >> On Mon, Apr 17, 2017 at 07:37PM, Denis Magda wrote:
> >>> Igniters,
> >>> 
> >>> GridGain, as one of the most active Apache Ignite contributors, has been
> >>> developing a unique distributed persistent store specifically for Apache
> >>> Ignite for more than a year in-house. It’s a fully ACID and ANSI-99 SQL
> >>> compliant fault-tolerant solution.
> >>> 
> >>> The store transparently integrates with Apache Ignite as an optional disk
> >>> layer (in addition to the existing RAM layer) via the new page memory
> >>> architecture that to be released in Apache Ignite 2.0. This allows
> >> storing
> >>> supersets of data on disk while having a subset in memory not worrying
> >> about
> >>> that you forgot to preload (warmup) your caches!
> >>> 
> >>> Assuming that the storage goes to ASF as a part of Apache Ignite 2.1
> >> release
> >>> the following will be supported by Ignite out-of-the-box:
> >>> 
> >>> * SQL queries execution over the data that is both in RAM and on disk: no
> >>> need to preload the whole data set in memory.
> >>> 
> >>> * Cluster instantaneous restarts: once your cluster ring is recovered
> >> after
> >>> a restart your applications are fully operational even if they highly
> >>> utilize SQL queries.
> >>> 
> >>> As for the use cases, it means that Apache Ignite will be possible to
> >> use as
> >>> a distributed SQL database with memory-first concept.
> >>> 
> >>> And we decided at GridGain that this tremendous feature should be open
> >>> source from the very beginning.
> >>> 
> >>> Guys, could you advise how I can start official donation process?
> >>> 
> >>> —
> >>> Denis
> 

Reply via email to