Ivan, In my understanding this mode does not work at all even in the presence of ForceKeysRequest which is now supposed to fetch values from peers in case of a miss. In this mode we 1) move partitions to OWNING state unconditionally, and 2) choose an arbitrary OWNING node for force keys request. Therefore, after a user started two additional nodes in a cluster, the request may be mapped to a node which does not hold any data. We will do a read-through in this case, but it will result in significant load increase on a third-party storage right after a node started, which means that adding a node will increase, not decrease, the load on the database being cached. All these issues go away when (A)SYNC mode is used.
Val, The idea makes sense to me - a user can use rebalance future to wait for rebalance to finish. This will simplify the configuration even further. пн, 20 июл. 2020 г. в 21:27, Valentin Kulichenko < valentin.kuliche...@gmail.com>: > +1 for deprecating/removing NONE mode. > > Alexey, what do you think about the SYNC mode? In my experience, it does > not add much value as well. I would go as far as removing the > rebalancingMode parameter altogether (probably in 3.0). > > -Val > > On Mon, Jul 20, 2020 at 11:09 AM Ivan Pavlukhin <vololo...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > Alexey, Igniters, > > > > Could you please outline motivation answering following questions? > > 1. Does this mode generally work correctly today? > > 2. Can this mode be useful at all? > > > > I can imagine that it might be useful in a transparent caching use > > case (if I did not misunderstand). > > > > 2020-07-20 20:39 GMT+03:00, Pavel Tupitsyn <ptupit...@apache.org>: > > > +1 > > > > > > More evidence: > > > > > > https://stackoverflow.com/questions/62902640/apache-ignite-cacherebalancemode-is-not-respected-by-nodes > > > > > > On Mon, Jul 20, 2020 at 8:26 PM Alexey Goncharuk > > > <alexey.goncha...@gmail.com> > > > wrote: > > > > > >> Igniters, > > >> > > >> I would like to run the idea of deprecating and probably ignoring the > > >> NONE > > >> rebalance mode by the community. It's in the removal list for Ignite > 3.0 > > >> [1], but it looks like it still confuses and creates issues for users > > >> [2]. > > >> > > >> What about deprecating it in one of the next releases and even > ignoring > > >> this constant in further releases, interpreting it as ASYNC, before > > >> Ignite > > >> 3.0? I find it hard to believe that any Ignite user actually has > > >> RebalanceMode.NONE set in their configuration due to its absolutely > > >> unpredictable behavior. > > >> > > >> Thanks for your thoughts, > > >> --AG > > >> > > >> [1] > > >> > > >> > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Apache+Ignite+3.0+Wishlist > > >> [2] > > >> > > >> > > > http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/About-Rebalance-Mode-SYNC-amp-NONE-td47279.html > > >> > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Best regards, > > Ivan Pavlukhin > > >
