On Mon, Nov 13, 2017 at 7:49 AM, Alexei Scherbakov < [email protected]> wrote:
> +1 > > In fact, after implementing this, we will no longer need rendezvous > affinity. > > Why do we need other affinity if we already provided ideal assignment to > user ? > Because rendezvous is completely stateless and fair affinity requires maintaining state between topology changes. I would keep both. > I suggest hiding affinity function from public API and make available > publicly only things like partition count and backup filter, because > implementing correct affinity function is error prone and rarely needed. > But what if you do to provide custom partition assignment? Some complex use cases do require it. > It's even be possible to store/calculate single partition map for all > caches if they share same partition count. > Don't we already do that with cache groups?
