Hi Denis,

Interesting results, thank you.

Unfortunately Ignite Persistence came twice in used features.

And it becomes a a little bit unclear which measurement should be
considered correct: max, min, or average.

Sincerely,
Dmitriy Pavlov


чт, 22 февр. 2018 г. в 4:17, Dmitriy Setrakyan <dsetrak...@apache.org>:

> Very useful.
>
> BTW, here is the ticket for MultiMap implementation. It has a very nice
> design proposal and looks fairly simple to implement.
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-640
>
> Hope someone in the community can pick it up.
>
> D.
>
> On Wed, Feb 21, 2018 at 3:56 PM, Denis Magda <dma...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > Igniters,
> >
> > The survey is off and here is a snapshot of the results:
> > https://www.surveymonkey.com/results/SM-2T8S87DH8/
> >
> > Noteworthy observations:
> >
> >    - 87% of respondents are software architects and engineers. These are
> >    the folks who help us to drive the project!
> >
> >
> >    - Most of Ignite use cases are in Banks and HighTech - this is what
> the
> >    consistency and in-memory speed are valued for!
> >
> >
> >    - Majority of the deployments store up to 100 GB of data in up to 20
> >    nodes clusters while 10% of deployments maintain hundreds and
> thousands
> >    nodes clusters - getting ready, community!
> >
> >
> >    - Ignite persistence is getting as valuable as the compute grid.
> >
> > Pay attention to the last question that contains a written individual
> > feedback. It should guide our plans. For instance, I like this proposal:
> >
> > MultiMap support like in Guava is badly needed. Hazelcast has this and is
> > highly used collection type, so much so this forces us to have to use
> > Hazelcast over Ignite sadly in many apps
> >
> > --
> > Denis
> >
>

Reply via email to