Looks like it's an Ignite term - I've never heard of it outside Ignite
scope.
Though, renaming existing enum value requires keeping old as deprecated.
DEFAULT is confusing enough to pay this price.
As for LOG_ONLY, I think we can keep it as long as it has good and
definitive javadoc.
Best Regards,
Ivan Rakov
On 16.02.2018 17:07, Dmitriy Setrakyan wrote:
Igniters, just to clarify, does the term LOG_ONLY mean anything in the
industry or is this just an Ignite term?
D.
On Fri, Feb 16, 2018 at 8:03 AM, Anton Vinogradov <avinogra...@gridgain.com>
wrote:
Log only mode: flushes application buffers.
So, in synced mode without fsync guarantee. That's why I propose to rename
it as SYNC.
On Fri, Feb 16, 2018 at 4:49 PM, Ilya Lantukh <ilant...@gridgain.com>
wrote:
I am OK with either FSYNC or STRICT variant.
LOG_ONLY name means "log without fsync".
On Fri, Feb 16, 2018 at 4:05 PM, Dmitriy Setrakyan <
dsetrak...@apache.org>
wrote:
On Fri, Feb 16, 2018 at 7:02 AM, Ivan Rakov <ivan.glu...@gmail.com>
wrote:
Why create a new term to define something that has already been
defined?
That makes sense. I'm ok with FSYNC.
Anton, I don't understand why we should rename LOG_ONLY to SYNC. We
started this discussion with bad naming of DEFAULT, but this has
nothing
to
do with LOG_ONLY (even though it may be scientific - but SYNC sounds
scientific as well).
I agree with Ivan, we should not go wild with renaming. However, I
would
like to find out what is the meaning behind the LOG_ONLY name. Can
someone
explain?
D.
--
Best regards,
Ilya
