2015-10-07 15:14 GMT+03:00 Andrey Kornev :
> Thanks, Yakov! I'm going to use your code (I hope it's Apache2 licensed:)))
>
You are welcome! No warranties, btw. I did not test this code :)
>
> As for the use case, it's quite simple. I have a group of compute nodes
> that are being sent a stream
odes in the group by some attribute.
This is pure compute, no caches.
Thanks
Andrey
> Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2015 13:46:23 +0300
> Subject: Re: Cluster group affinity
> From: yzhda...@apache.org
> To: dev@ignite.apache.org
>
> Andrey, probably it is, but I am not sure if I have ever
cluster group, and why it must necessarily be a cache. Isn't the
> cache affinity just a special case of the cluster group affinity defined as
> ClusterGroup.forCache()?
>
> Thanks
> Andrey
>
> > From: dsetrak...@apache.org
> > Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2015 12:07:39 -0700
> &
don't think it's practical to create
that many caches.
I still can't get why the affinity function can't be applied to an arbitrary
cluster group, and why it must necessarily be a cache. Isn't the cache affinity
just a special case of the cluster group affinity def
returns an Affinity instance
corresponding to the group? Cheers!
_
From: Andrey Gura
Sent: Tuesday, October 6, 2015 9:31 PM
Subject: Re: Cluster group affinity
To:
>
> Just curios, how about providing an override for Ignite.a
is)?
>
> Regards
> Andrey
>
> > Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2015 18:12:48 +0300
> > Subject: Re: Cluster group affinity
> > From: ag...@gridgain.com
> > To: dev@ignite.apache.org
> >
> > Andrey,
> >
> >
> > > 1) I'm expected to return an ins
ally associated with data. In your case you have no data,
but you still need keys to be always mapped to the same node. How about
creating an empty cache and using standard cache API for determining the
affinity for a key?
> Regards
> Andrey
>
> > Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2015 18:1
Ignite.affinity() method that
ClusterGroup? Is there something fundamentally wrong about calculating the
affinity for an arbitrary collection of nodes (such as a ClusterGroup is)?
Regards
Andrey
> Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2015 18:12:48 +0300
> Subject: Re: Cluster group affinity
> From: ag..
ologyVersion.
> 2) the consequences of returning null from
> AffinityFunctionContext.previousAssignment and
> AffinityFunctionContext.discoveryEvent methods (because I can't provide any
> meaningful implementation for them) are not clear.
>
> Please advise.
>
> Thanks
>
.discoveryEvent methods (because I can't provide any
meaningful implementation for them) are not clear.
Please advise.
Thanks
Andrey
> Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2015 16:43:10 +0300
> Subject: Re: Cluster group affinity
> From: ag...@gridgain.com
> To: dev@ignite.
he partition id to a cluster node. So I'm a
> little bit confused right now.
>
> Could you please clarify?
>
> Thanks a lot
> Andrey
>
> > From: dsetrak...@apache.org
> > Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2015 09:53:25 -0700
> > Subject: Re: Cluster group affinity
> > To
5 Oct 2015 09:53:25 -0700
> Subject: Re: Cluster group affinity
> To: dev@ignite.apache.org
>
> On Mon, Oct 5, 2015 at 2:28 AM, Andrey Kornev
> wrote:
>
> > Hello,
> >
> > I have a user-defined cluster group and I'd like to be able to
> > consistent
On Mon, Oct 5, 2015 at 2:28 AM, Andrey Kornev
wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I have a user-defined cluster group and I'd like to be able to
> consistently pick the same node in the group for a given key. Essentially,
> what I want is a cluster group affinity that is not associated with
Hello,
I have a user-defined cluster group and I'd like to be able to consistently
pick the same node in the group for a given key. Essentially, what I want is a
cluster group affinity that is not associated with any cache. How can I do it?
Thanks
Andrey
14 matches
Mail list logo
