Hi Team, As proposed here, we added support to propagate eviction and expiration (destroy) operation to AsyncEventQueue using single flag/attribute "ignoreEvictionAndExpiration" by default which is true (to keep the same behavior) and one could set (false) to receive eviction/expiration event...
But we come across a product issue, GEODE-1472, that cause data inconsistency (with eviction destroy)....For this reason we are planning to break the "ignoreEvictionAndExpiration" attribute to eviction and expiration specific: "ignoreEvictionDestroy", "ignoreExpirationDestroy"... Currently we are planning to support "ignoreExpirationDestroy", and add "ignoreEvictionDestroy" once GEODE-1472 is fixed... Looking for comments on this... Thanks, -Anil. https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GEODE-1472 On Tue, Apr 12, 2016 at 6:04 PM, Anilkumar Gingade <aging...@pivotal.io> wrote: > Kirk, We could not think of any such requirement...And with this > application will get all the update operation and can take appropriate > action (use or ignore)... > > -Anil. > > > > On Tue, Apr 12, 2016 at 5:46 PM, Kirk Lund <kl...@pivotal.io> wrote: > >> Would any user ever have a reason to enable forwarding of one type but not >> the other? If so then I would separate them as forwardEvictionEvents() and >> forwardExpirationEvents(). >> >> >> On Tue, Apr 12, 2016 at 5:44 PM, Kirk Lund <kl...@pivotal.io> wrote: >> >> > +1 for being more explicit with the "And" conjunction >> > >> > -Kirk >> > >> > >> > On Tue, Apr 12, 2016 at 5:25 PM, Anthony Baker <aba...@pivotal.io> >> wrote: >> > >> >> I’d prefer to insert a conjunction to clarify the meaning: >> >> >> >> forwardEvictionAndExpirationEvents() >> >> >> >> >> >> $0.02, >> >> Anthony >> >> >> >> On Apr 12, 2016, at 5:11 PM, Anilkumar Gingade <aging...@pivotal.io> >> >> wrote: >> >> >> >> *New attribute:* "forwardEvictionExpirationEvents()" (Any alternate >> >> names?). >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > >> > >
