annagobova commented on code in PR #10585:
URL: https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/10585#discussion_r1150292656
##########
docs/_docs/snapshots/snapshots.adoc:
##########
Review Comment:
Does we consider a "write-ahead" as an understandable term? Can we replace
it with "write-ahead logging" (or "write-ahead logs") for consistency with
"checkpointing":
- 1 var. "Write-ahead logging and checkpointing..."
- or 2nd var. "Write-ahead logs and checkpoints..."
(both words with the same form)?
##########
docs/_docs/snapshots/snapshots.adoc:
##########
Review Comment:
Recommend to add "the":
It contains `wal` directory that stores **the** compressed WAL segments,
`binary_meta` and `marshaller` directories.
##########
docs/_docs/snapshots/snapshots.adoc:
##########
Review Comment:
I propose to add some articles and rephrase a little:
**The** restoring procedure consists of **several** steps. At first, **a**
full snapshot is restored, and after that all incremental snapshots are
sequentially applied.
I replaced "multiple" to a "several" . From the point of the meaning, "the
several steps" is more closer to the procedure “in a few steps”, and not to a
complex procedure from numerous steps (as in case with "multiple").
Is it okay?
##########
docs/_docs/snapshots/snapshots.adoc:
##########
Review Comment:
I propose to add some articles and rephrase a little:
**The** low RPO value (Recovery Point Object), **e.g.**, a few minutes,
**can hardly be** achieved using full snapshots. The full snapshots require
additional resources to create and store all data partitions.
Is it okay?
##########
docs/_docs/snapshots/snapshots.adoc:
##########
Review Comment:
I propose to rephrase a little:
**If necessary,** it's possible to repair ...
##########
docs/_docs/snapshots/snapshots.adoc:
##########
Review Comment:
I propose to add some articles and rephrase a little, because the sentence
is too complex:
**The** low RPO value (Recovery Point Object), **e.g.**, a few minutes,
**can hardly be** achieved **using full snapshots**. The full snapshots require
additional resources **to create and store** all partitions data.
Is it okay?
##########
docs/_docs/snapshots/snapshots.adoc:
##########
Review Comment:
I propose to replace "that" to "which", because the second part about "run
concurrently with runtime load" seems essential. Is it right?
##########
docs/_docs/snapshots/snapshots.adoc:
##########
Review Comment:
Can we add "to" before the list or before each list item to specify verbs
and simplify user navigation?
... incremental snapshots (**to**):
- **to** store **the** data changes **from the** previous full or
incremental snapshot;
- **to** provide a lightweight creation process, which can be run
concurrently with runtime load
##########
docs/_docs/snapshots/snapshots.adoc:
##########
Review Comment:
Can we replace the point 2 under the list? Now this paragraph looks
interrupted: "Instead, incremental snapshots can be used: - consist of
compressed WAL segments that are collected in background without pressure on
cluster resources".
For example, we could rephrase:
Instead, you can use incremental snapshots:
- to store ..
- to provide....
NB: incremental snapshots consist of compressed WAL segments, which are
collected in the background without pressure on cluster resources
##########
docs/_docs/snapshots/snapshots.adoc:
##########
Review Comment:
I propose to add an indicator:
Please refer **to the sections** ...
##########
docs/_docs/snapshots/snapshots.adoc:
##########
Review Comment:
I propose to add an article and rephrase a little:
In general, stop the cluster, then replace **the** persistence data and
other files **using** the data from the snapshot, and restart the nodes.
##########
docs/_docs/snapshots/snapshots.adoc:
##########
Review Comment:
I propose to turn into a passive voice to emphasize the restriction:
**Only the** full snapshot **can be restored**.
##########
docs/_docs/snapshots/snapshots.adoc:
##########
Review Comment:
Can we split this sentence into two parts? Now it looks to complex for
understanding. I propose this variant:
The snapshot structure is similar to the layout of the Ignite Native
Persistence. **Therefore,** **to restore** the manual snapshot, you must
**restore** a snapshot only on the same cluster with the same node
`consistentId` and on the same topology on which a snapshot was taken.
##########
docs/_docs/snapshots/snapshots.adoc:
##########
Review Comment:
I propose to rephrase a little:
**This** allows **you** to start incremental snapshots concurrently with
**the** runtime load without affecting performance.
##########
docs/_docs/snapshots/snapshots.adoc:
##########
Review Comment:
I propose to add "the" article:
... and prevents **the** incremental snapshot creation
##########
docs/_docs/snapshots/snapshots.adoc:
##########
Review Comment:
I propose to add "the" article:
After **the** link:...
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]
