Ah, interesting. Thanks for the suggestion! On Sat, Dec 29, 2018 at 03:04 Ilya Kasnacheev <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hello! > > Yes, you are right, you will have use some other means of expiry. However, > you can also have a separate data region without persistence for data which > should be prone to expiry. > > Regards, > > -- > Ilya Kasnacheev > > > сб, 29 дек. 2018 г. в 00:48, Scott Feldstein <[email protected]>: > >> Hi Ilya, >> Thanks. I assume since I’m using persistence that expiry of the data is >> the only way to ensure that it is eventually purged. Is that correct or is >> there something else I should look at? >> >> Yep, I’m fine with upgrading to 2.7, we like to be as close to the >> bleeding edge with our technology stack anyway :) >> On Fri, Dec 28, 2018 at 06:41 Ilya Kasnacheev <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> Hello! >>> >>> Since Ignite 2.0 works with OffHeap pages mostly, Page Eviction works >>> best if you don't care about data (pure cache mode): >>> https://apacheignite.readme.io/docs/evictions >>> >>> If it works for 2.7.0 I recommend you to stick with is, since if one >>> would be fixing 2.6 they will yield 2.7 anyway :) >>> >>> Regards, >>> >>> -- >>> Ilya Kasnacheev >>> >>> >>> ср, 26 дек. 2018 г. в 22:25, Scott Feldstein <[email protected]>: >>> >>>> hi Ilya, >>>> Why wouldn't many people use Expiry with 2.x? Is there another feature >>>> that I should be using that accomplishes the same thing? >>>> >>>> I've reproduced the issue for 2.6.0, but with 2.7.0 it looks like it is >>>> working. Here is the repro if anyone is interested - >>>> >>>> https://github.com/scottmf/ignite-expiry-repro >>>> >>>> On Tue, Dec 25, 2018 at 5:30 AM Ilya Kasnacheev < >>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hello! >>>>> >>>>> Not many people are using Expiry with 2.x. >>>>> >>>>> If you can share a reproducer, please create a ticket right away and I >>>>> hope that somebody will look into it. >>>>> >>>>> Regards, >>>>> -- >>>>> Ilya Kasnacheev >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> вт, 25 дек. 2018 г. в 01:36, Scott Feldstein <[email protected]>: >>>>> >>>>>> Thanks Ilya, I’ll upgrade and see if that works soon. Right now we’ve >>>>>> switched to only using partitioned caches to avoid this issue. If it’s >>>>>> something that isn’t fixed with 2.7 then I’ll create a bug and attach >>>>>> code >>>>>> to reproduce it. >>>>>> >>>>>> I’m really surprised that no one else is complaining about it. The >>>>>> repro is very straight forward.. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Mon, Dec 24, 2018 at 06:36 Ilya Kasnacheev < >>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Hello! >>>>>>> >>>>>>> There could be fixes for expiration between 2.6 and 2.7. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> However, if it will still be the case, we would be glad if you could >>>>>>> post reproducer for this behavior. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Note that you can almost emulate replicated cache by creating >>>>>>> partitioned cache with large number of backups, maybe you should be >>>>>>> using >>>>>>> that in the meantime. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Regards, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> Ilya Kasnacheev >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> пт, 21 дек. 2018 г. в 23:28, scottmf <[email protected]>: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I forgot to mention this is on Ignite 2.6.0 and i'm running with a >>>>>>>> 3 node >>>>>>>> cluster. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I've been experimenting some more and I'm finding that using >>>>>>>> PARTITIONED >>>>>>>> caches works fine, but replicated caches stop expiring usually >>>>>>>> within 10 >>>>>>>> minutes. The behavior is very consistent. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I plan on trying this with Ignite 2.7.0... >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> Sent from: http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/ >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>
