Val,
> What is the use case for which current affinityRun/Call API doesn't work?
It does not work for map/reduce.
On Fri, Jul 21, 2017 at 11:42 PM, Valentin Kulichenko <
valentin.kuliche...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Maxim,
>
> The issue is that it's currently assumed to support job mapping, but it
> actually doesn't. However, I agree that AffinityKeyMapped annotation
> doesn't fit the use case well. Let's fix documentation and JavaDoc then.
>
> As for the proposed API, it's overcomplicated, took me 15 minutes to
> understand what it does :)
>
> What is the use case for which current affinityRun/Call API doesn't work?
>
> -Val
>
> On Fri, Jul 21, 2017 at 5:57 AM, Kozlov Maxim <dreamx....@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Valentin,
> >
> > The author of tiket wants to see to provide some API allows to map
> > ComputeJobs to partitions or keys. If we use @AffinityKeyMapped then you
> > need to enter the cache name parameter, I think this is not convenient
> for
> > the user. Therefore, I propose to extend the existing API.
> > Having consulted with Anton V. decided to make a separate interface
> > ReducibleTask, which will allow us to have different map logic at each
> > inheritor.
> >
> > Old method, allows to map to node
> > public interface ComputeTask<T, R> extends ReducibleTask<R> {
> > @Nullable public Map<? extends ComputeJob, ClusterNode>
> > map(List<ClusterNode> subgrid, @Nullable T arg) throws IgniteException;
> > }
> >
> > Brand new method with mapping to partitions, which solves topology change
> > issues.
> > public interface AffinityComputeTask<T, R> extends ReducibleTask<R> {
> > @Nullable public Map<? extends ComputeJob, Integer>
> map(@NotnullString
> > cacheName, List<Integer> partIds, @Nullable T arg) throws
> IgniteException;
> > }
> >
> > public interface ReducibleTask<R> extends Serializable {
> > public ComputeJobResultPolicy result(ComputeJobResult res,
> > List<ComputeJobResult> rcvd) throws IgniteException;
> >
> > @Nullable public R reduce(List<ComputeJobResult> results) throws
> > IgniteException;
> > }
> >
> > We also need to implement AffinityComputeTaskAdapter and
> > AffinityComputeTaskSplitAdapter, for implementation by default. It is
> > right?
> >
> > In the IgniteCompute add:
> >
> > @IgniteAsyncSupported
> > public <T, R> R affinityExecute(Class<? extends AffinityComputeTask<T,
> R>>
> > taskCls, List<Integer> partIds, @Nullable T arg) throws IgniteException;
> > @IgniteAsyncSupported
> > public <T, R> R affinityExecute(AffinityComputeTask<T, R> task,
> > List<Integer> partIds, @Nullable T arg) throws IgniteException;
> >
> > public <T, R> ComputeTaskFuture<R> affinityExecuteAsync(Class<? extends
> > AffinityComputeTask<T, R>> taskCls, List<Integer> partIds, @Nullable T
> arg)
> > throws IgniteException;
> > public <T, R> ComputeTaskFuture<R> affinityExecuteAsync(
> AffinityComputeTask<T,
> > R> task, List<Integer> partIds, @Nullable T arg) throws IgniteException;
> >
> >
> > How do you like this idea or do you insist that you need to use
> > @AffinityKeyMapped to solve the problem?
> >
> >
> > > 13 июля 2017 г., в 6:36, Valentin Kulichenko <
> > valentin.kuliche...@gmail.com> написал(а):
> > >
> > > Hi Max,
> > >
> > > This ticket doesn't assume any API changes, it's about broken
> > > functionality. I would start with checking what tests we have
> > > for @AffinityKeyMapped and creating missing one. From what I understand
> > > functionality is broken completely or almost completely, so I guess
> > testing
> > > coverage is very weak there.
> > >
> > > -Val
> > >
> > > On Wed, Jul 12, 2017 at 4:27 PM, Kozlov Maxim <dreamx....@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > >> Igniters,
> > >>
> > >> jira: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-5037 <
> > >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-5037>
> > >> How do you look to solve this ticket by adding two methods to the
> public
> > >> IgniteCompute API?
> > >>
> > >> @IgniteAsyncSupported
> > >> public void affinityRun(@NotNull Collection<String> cacheNames,
> > >> Collection<Object> keys, IgniteRunnable job)
> > >> throws IgniteException;
> > >>
> > >> @IgniteAsyncSupported
> > >> public <R> R affinityCall(@NotNull Collection<String> cacheNames,
> > >> Collection<Object> keys, IgniteCallable<R> job)
> > >> throws IgniteException;
> > >>
> > >> There is also a question of how to act when changing the topology
> during
> > >> the execution of the job.
> > >> 1) complete with an exception;
> > >> 2) stop execution and wait until the topology is rebuilt and continue
> > >> execution;
> > >>
> > >> I think the second way, do you think?
> > >>
> > >> --
> > >> Best Regards,
> > >> Max K.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> >
> > --
> > Best Regards,
> > Max K.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
