Manik, what's wrong with Dan's suggestion with clearing the cache before 
shutdown?

On 31 May 2013, at 14:20, Manik Surtani <[email protected]> wrote:

>> 
>> If we only want to deal with full cluster shutdown, then I think stopping 
>> all application requests, calling Cache.clear() on one node, and then 
>> shutting down all the nodes should be simpler. On start, assuming no cache 
>> store, the caches will start empty, so starting all the nodes at once and 
>> only allowing application requests when they've all joined should also work 
>> without extra work.
>> 
>> If we only want to stop a part of the cluster, suppressing rebalancing would 
>> be better, because we wouldn't lose all the data. But we'd still lose the 
>> keys whose owners are all among the nodes we want to stop. I've discussed 
>> this with Adrian, and we think if we want to stop a part of the cluster 
>> without losing data we need a JMX operation on the coordinator that will 
>> "atomically" remove a set of nodes from the CH. After the operation 
>> completes, the user will know it's safe to stop those nodes without losing 
>> data.
> 
> I think the no-data-loss option is bigger scope, perhaps part of ISPN-1394.  
> And that's not what I am asking about.
> 
>> When it comes to starting a part of the cluster, a "pause rebalancing" 
>> option would probably be better - but again, on the coordinator, not on each 
>> joining node. And clearly, if more than numOwner nodes leave while 
>> rebalancing is suspended, data will be lost.
> 
> Yup.  This sort of option would only be used where data loss isn't an issue 
> (such as a distributed cache).  Where data loss is an issue, we'd need more 
> control - ISPN-1394.
> 

Cheers,
-- 
Mircea Markus
Infinispan lead (www.infinispan.org)





_______________________________________________
infinispan-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev

Reply via email to