Ivan, enableWal/disableWal will return false in case enabling/disabling was caused not by this call. For example it will return false in case wal already enabled/disabled.
Example: boolean res1 = srv.cluster().enableWal(CACHE_NAME); boolean res2 = srv.cluster().enableWal(CACHE_NAME); assert res1; assert !res2; Vova, Since you made final tuning for this solution, is there any special cases when false can be returned? пт, 11 мая 2018 г. в 18:39, Ivan Rakov <ivan.glu...@gmail.com>: > Agree about collections. > > Regarding return type: it's a tricky question. Maybe author of this > feature may help. > Anton V., in which case enableWal/disableWal can return false? > > Best Regards, > Ivan Rakov > > On 11.05.2018 18:19, Vladimir Ozerov wrote: > > Ivan, > > > > This proven to be too hard to understand. It is better to have a lot > small > > methods with clear and compact semantics. Also arrays are harder to > manage > > than collections, users typically prefer the latest. > > Also we need to think on what would be a result of this operation. > Current > > methods with a single cache return true/false based on whether they > changed > > something or not. Should we continue returning a single boolean for batch > > operations as well? > > > > On Fri, May 11, 2018 at 6:13 PM, Ivan Rakov <ivan.glu...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > >> It would be six methods in total (3 for enabling, 3 for disabling). > >> What about accepting null in *enableWAL(String... caches)* as wildcard? > >> > >> Best Regards, > >> Ivan Rakov > >> > >> > >> On 11.05.2018 17:52, Andrey Mashenkov wrote: > >> > >>> Ivan, > >>> > >>> Huge +1 for this improvement. > >>> > >>> I think we can have 2 overloaded method enableWal() with no args to > enable > >>> WAL for all caches > >>> and enableWAL(String... caches) for one or multiple caches. (and same > for > >>> disable wal) > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> On Fri, May 11, 2018 at 5:25 PM, Dmitriy Govorukhin < > >>> dmitriy.govoruk...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>> > >>> Ivan, > >>>> Agree, if we have the batch method for cache create, we should have > the > >>>> ability to enable/disable WAL in the batch too. > >>>> > >>>> On Fri, May 11, 2018 at 5:17 PM, Ivan Rakov <ivan.glu...@gmail.com> > >>>> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> Igniters, > >>>>> API method for disabling WAL in IgniteCluster accepts only one cache > >>>>> > >>>> name. > >>>> > >>>>> Every call triggers exchange and checkpoints cluster-wide - it takes > >>>>> > >>>> plenty > >>>> > >>>>> of time to disable/enable WAL for multiple caches. > >>>>> I think, we should add option to disable/enable WAL for several > caches > >>>>> with single command. > >>>>> > >>>>> Thoughts? > >>>>> > >>>>> -- > >>>>> Best Regards, > >>>>> Ivan Rakov > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>> > >
