Keep in mind that the context of the regions in question is the cluster. So these regions would be created on servers. So, for example, does anyone see a need to create PROXY regions on the server? Even if we did not support them on the server, they would still be supported on clients.
On Mon, Aug 19, 2019 at 4:26 PM Jinmei Liao <jil...@pivotal.io> wrote: > Region type (in another word Region shortcut) defines a set of attributes > for a region. These are the list of region types we have: > > LOCAL, > LOCAL_PERSISTENT, > LOCAL_HEAP_LRU, > LOCAL_OVERFLOW, > LOCAL_PERSISTENT_OVERFLOW, > > PARTITION, > PARTITION_REDUNDANT, > PARTITION_PERSISTENT, > PARTITION_REDUNDANT_PERSISTENT, > PARTITION_OVERFLOW, > PARTITION_REDUNDANT_OVERFLOW, > PARTITION_PERSISTENT_OVERFLOW, > PARTITION_REDUNDANT_PERSISTENT_OVERFLOW, > PARTITION_HEAP_LRU, > PARTITION_REDUNDANT_HEAP_LRU, > > REPLICATE, > REPLICATE_PERSISTENT, > REPLICATE_OVERFLOW, > REPLICATE_PERSISTENT_OVERFLOW, > REPLICATE_HEAP_LRU, > > REPLICATE_PROXY, > PARTITION_PROXY, > PARTITION_PROXY_REDUNDANT, > > In region management rest api, especially in PCC world, we are wondering > 1) should we allow users to create LOCAL* regions through management rest > api? > 2) should we allow users to create *PROXY regions through management rest > api? > 3) for the rest of the PARTITION* and REPLICATE* types, should we strive to > keep the region type list the same as before, or only keep the type as > REPLICATE/PARTITION, but use other properties like "redundantCopy" and > "evictionAction" to allow different permutations of region attributes? > > comments appreciated! > -- > Cheers > > Jinmei >
