Guys, What is the result of this discussion? Do we still not support eviction and expiration on persistence level? If so, any plans to change this?
-Val On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 9:45 AM, Denis Magda <dma...@apache.org> wrote: > We might break the compatibility for the next major release or even create > a tool that will migrate persistence files from an old to new formats. > > — > Denis > > > On Nov 21, 2017, at 8:34 AM, Dmitry Pavlov <dpavlov....@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > Hi Denis, > > > > Second fix we need to do is B+ tree separation in per-partition basis: > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-5874 > > > > Should we take into account compatibilty issues with previous Ignite > > persistent store versions, because current TTL tree is persisted, and > will > > change its format? > > > > Sincerely, > > Dmitriy Pavlov > > > > > > вт, 21 нояб. 2017 г. в 2:13, Denis Magda <dma...@apache.org>: > > > >> Dmitriy, > >> > >> That’s about TTL and eviction support for Ignite persistence. Presently > if > >> you set an expiration or eviction policy for a cache it will be applied > for > >> data stored in memory. The policy never affects the persistence layer. > >> > >> — > >> Denis > >> > >>> On Nov 20, 2017, at 9:29 AM, Dmitry Pavlov <dpavlov....@gmail.com> > >> wrote: > >>> > >>> Hi Denis, > >>> > >>> Is this need covered by PDS + TTL? > >>> > >>> For the very first TTL test, I found some delay after applying TTL with > >> the > >>> repository enabled: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-6964 > >>> > >>> And I'm wondering if the user's needs are covered by > >>> https://apacheignite.readme.io/docs/expiry-policies plus > >>> https://apacheignite.readme.io/docs/distributed-persistent-store > >>> > >>> Sincerely, > >>> Dmitriy Pavlov > >>> > >>> сб, 18 нояб. 2017 г. в 12:12, Dmitry Pavlov <dpavlov....@gmail.com>: > >>> > >>>> Hi Denis, > >>>> > >>>> What is the difference of required by users functionality with TTL > cache > >>>> expiration? > >>>> > >>>> By some posts I can suppose TTL cache is compatible with native > >>>> persistence. > >>>> > >>>> Sincerely, > >>>> Dmitriy Pavlov > >>>> > >>>> сб, 18 нояб. 2017 г. в 0:41, Denis Magda <dma...@apache.org>: > >>>> > >>>>> Igniters, > >>>>> > >>>>> I’ve been talking to many Ignite users here and there who are already > >> on > >>>>> Ignite persistence or consider to turn it on. The majority of them > are > >> more > >>>>> than satisfied with its current state and provided capabilities. > >> That’s is > >>>>> really good news for us. > >>>>> > >>>>> However, I tend to come across the people who ask about > >>>>> eviction/expiration policies for the persistence itself. Had around 6 > >>>>> conversation about the topic this month only. > >>>>> > >>>>> Usually the requirement is connected with a streaming use case. When > an > >>>>> application streams a lot of data (IoT, metrics, etc.) to the cluster > >> but > >>>>> the data becomes stale in some period of time (day, couple of days, > >> etc.). > >>>>> The user doesn’t want to waste the disk space and needs to simple > >> purge the > >>>>> data from there. > >>>>> > >>>>> My suggestion here is to create a timer task that will remove the > stale > >>>>> data from the cluster. However, since the demand is growing probably > >> it’s a > >>>>> good time to discuss a feasibility of this feature. > >>>>> > >>>>> Alex G, as the main architect of the persistence, could you share > your > >>>>> thoughts on this? What will it cost to us to support > >> eviction/expiration > >>>>> for the persistence? > >>>>> > >>>>> — > >>>>> Denis > >>>> > >>>> > >> > >> > >
