Hi, Replicated cache have all entries available on the node, so reads from REPLICATED cache are always local.
2016-05-12 23:46 GMT+03:00 zshamrock <[email protected]>: > I have couple of caches which are initialized per system event, and then > almost stay untouched for the next 1 or 2 hours. And only reads are used. > First of all is it a good use case for the REPLICATED cache? Data is small, > just int to int mapping. > > The main question is why REPLICATED cache behaves better for frequent reads > comparing to PARTITIONED. As I understood from > https://apacheignite.readme.io/docs/cache-modes#replicated-mode, > PARTITIONED > cache with backups set to all is used underneath. Is still affinity > collocation is in place for the REPLICATED cache? If, so it means it has to > go to the primary server every time anyway, so no different comparing to > REPLICATED. So, what are the factors who are giving the better read > performance for REPLICATED cache comparing to PARTITIONED? > > > > -- > View this message in context: > http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/How-REPLICATED-cache-is-more-performant-comparing-to-PARTITIONED-tp4915.html > Sent from the Apache Ignite Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > -- Best regards, Alexei Scherbakov
