On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 12:28 PM, Konstantin Boudnik <c...@apache.org> wrote:
> This conversation reminds me of the situation with Spark and akka that I
> just
> ran into. Or rather with Akka and the way they designed the remote
> execution.
> The situation is actually _completely_ ridiculous. I stood up a small Spark
> cluster and then tried to submit a job into it, which had some
> Spark dependencies. The way the job is written it pulls the dependencies
> automatically from the maven repo. To my horror, the job was crashing
> because
> local and remote serialIDs of the classes differed, although the dependency
> versions were the same. The root cause is this: the versions are compiled
> with
> the same version of JDK (like JDK7) or something, but one is Open and the
> other one is Oracle's.
>
> I think this is a very shaky way of designing the software for distributed
> environments and it badly complicates the operation and integration of the
> clusters. It clearly shows the lack practical experience beyond the
> academic
> ivory towers on the account of Akka guys. RPC, while not without its own
> issues, allows to get around such problems with ease.
>
> I guess what I am saying: aren't we trying to find an even more complex
> solution for already pretty tough problem?
>
I think that the problem you are describing is not the same. What we are
solving here is, for example, ability to run Ignite with IBM WebSphere on
the client side and OpenJDK on the server side.
This issue has little to do with dependencies, and mostly with removing a
legacy restriction from the project about matching JDK versions.
>
> Cos
>
> On Thu, Oct 08, 2015 at 09:31PM, Vladimir Ozerov wrote:
> > Why are we sticked to version? If both JVM has the same major version,
> but
> > different vendors, it might be even more important concern, than
> different
> > major versions of the same vendor.
> >
> > On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 8:48 PM, Dmitriy Setrakyan <dsetrak...@apache.org
> >
> > wrote:
> >
> > > On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 9:52 AM, Andrey Gura <ag...@gridgain.com>
> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Igniters,
> > > >
> > > > There are cases when Ignite cluster nodes work on different
> environments
> > > > and JDKs (versions and/or vendors). GridDiscoveryManager class
> contains
> > > > check that all nodes in topology ran under JDKs with the same major
> Java
> > > > version and throws exception if check failed. I want to replace this
> on
> > > > warning message. So I have two questions:
> > > >
> > > > 1. Is there any objections about it?
> > > >
> > >
> > > I agree. Ignite should allow nodes with different JDKs join the
> cluster.
> > >
> > >
> > > > 2. What message will be more informative than current one ("Local
> node's
> > > > java major version is different from remote node's one
> > > > [locJvmMajVer=<locJvmMajVer>, rmtJvmMajVer=<rmtJvmMajVer>]")?
> > > >
> > >
> > > How about:
> > > ---
> > > Local java version is different from remote [loc=<locJvmMajVer>,
> > > rmt=<rmtJvmMajVer>]"
> > > ---
> > >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Andrey Gura
> > > > GridGain Systems, Inc.
> > > > www.gridgain.com
> > > >
> > >
>
