Here is the ticket: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-6115 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-6115>
If anybody is interested go ahead and take over it. — Denis > On Aug 17, 2017, at 5:16 PM, Dmitriy Setrakyan <dsetrak...@apache.org> wrote: > > Agree. If we remove the exception though, we need to make sure to print out > the warning that the eviction policy will be ignored with Ignite native > persistence enabled. > > On Thu, Aug 17, 2017 at 1:35 PM, Denis Magda <dma...@apache.org> wrote: > >> Dmitriy, >> >>>> Developers, >>>> >>>> Let me bring this to your attention. Why do we throw an exception if the >>>> user has both an eviction policy and the Ignite persistence configured? >> Why >>>> don’t we simply ignore the eviction policy printing a warning and >> proceed >>>> with the node startup? >>>> >>> >>> Denis, any reason one approach is better than another? >> >> The user doesn’t need to struggle with a bout of failures once he enable >> the Ignite persistence. This specific user had the memory policy configured >> before and once he enabled the disk he got extra exception he has to deal >> with. It shouldn’t work this way. >> >> In any case, the exception’s message doesn’t explain how to overcome the >> issue and has to be improved: >> >> Caused by: class org.apache.ignite.IgniteCheckedException: Page eviction >> is >> not compatible with persistence: 1G_Region >> >> — >> Denis
