This is possible, but then if two caches belong to the same memory policy, they must be both either persistence-enabled or persistence-disabled. We can add this validation, but I think this will lead to a greater confusion for a user.
2017-09-12 12:34 GMT+03:00 Pavel Tupitsyn <ptupit...@apache.org>: > Agree with Vladimir. > > Currently we enable persistence cluster-wide by setting > IgniteConfiguration.persistentStoreConfiguration. > Ideally CacheConfiguration.persistenceEnabled should be the only setting I > need to set. > > Thanks, > Pavel > > On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 12:28 PM, Vladimir Ozerov <voze...@gridgain.com> > wrote: > > > As a user I would definitely prefer to control persistence through flag > on > > cache configuration. I do not even want to know what "memory policy" is. > > E.g. CacheConfiguration.persistenceEnabled. > > > > On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 12:24 PM, Alexey Goncharuk < > > alexey.goncha...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > Igniters, > > > > > > I am currently reviewing a change allowing to enable persistence on a > > > per-memory-policy basis (thanks to K. Dudkov!) and have a question > > > regarding the changes in configuration. > > > > > > The suggested change is to add a flag "persistenceEnabled" (defaults to > > > true) to the memory policy configuration. To keep configuration > > > compatibility, the logic is as follows: > > > > > > If PersistentStoreConfiguration is set, then only memory policies with > > > persistenceEnabled=true flag will be persisted, which is consistent > with > > > the current behavior. To disable persistence, persistenceEnabled flag > > > should be explicitly set to false. > > > > > > If PersistentStoreConfiguration is not set, then all caches are stored > > > in-memory and persistenceEnabled is ignored. > > > > > > While personally, I like this change, I would like to check if there > are > > > any thoughts or objections to this approach. > > > > > > -- > > > Thanks, > > > AG > > > > > >
