>>> What is the exact scenario when cache is not available? If this means absence of node A, then you can lose after initialization of B,
It is just a test. In real project, of course, there are many nodes holding the cache. Node A represents a part of cluster. >>> I would recommend to use Ignite#getOrCreateCache method Yes, on the nodes keeping and serving the cache. "Client" nodes don't provide the cache configuration. They can only use cache(). I moved the cache acquring in a handler of ContextRefreshedEvent. Looks enough for now. >>> In addition, it sounds like node B can be a client which eliminates a >>> requirement to have a node filter. No. It's a server node for another purposes. We don't want to spread some caches across whole cluster bit only on dedicated nodes. Often they are the ones which need faster access to the cache. >>> This sounds weird, I think there is some other factor that we're >>> missing. Can you create a simple GitHub project that reproduces this >>> behavior and share it with us? Ok. Once I get time I'll create a special topic. Thanks -- View this message in context: http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/NodeFilter-for-cache-and-GridDhtPartitionsExchangeFuture-Failed-to-wait-for-partition-release-future-tp14179p14489.html Sent from the Apache Ignite Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
