In this case, you should be using this API on IgniteCompute: affinityRun(Collection<String> cacheNames, int partId, IgniteRunnable job)
This will ensure that the partition is not migrated while the computation is in progress. Why is this method insufficient? As far as IgniteCompute deprecating the "withAsync" API, the async behavior will now be supported through direct async API invocations now, so the support for async behavior is still there. D. On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 11:59 AM, Alexei Scherbakov < alexey.scherbak...@gmail.com> wrote: > Dmitriy, > > I know I could, but it requires too much work and messing with various APIs > for correct routing/failover. > > What about automatic partition reservation for consitency? How could I > achieve what using only affinity API ? > > I think this should be available out of the box, as for affinityRun/Call. > > Moreover, I could say the same for affinityRun/Call. One can use affinity > API and determine node to send a closure. Why bother with additional > methods ? > > And javadoc in AffinityKeyMapped definitely should be fixed, because it > refers to unexistent things. > > 2017-04-19 21:38 GMT+03:00 Dmitriy Setrakyan <dsetrak...@apache.org>: > > > Alexey, > > > > Have you taken a look at the Affinity API in Ignite? It seems that it has > > all the functionality you may need to map partitions to nodes. You can > take > > that info, and use it to route your computations. > > > > https://ignite.apache.org/releases/latest/javadoc/org/ > > apache/ignite/cache/affinity/Affinity.html > > > > D. > > > > On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 10:09 AM, Alexei Scherbakov < > > alexey.scherbak...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > Guys, > > > > > > Currently I'm looking into the problem how to properly deliver > > computation > > > to data in most efficient way. > > > > > > Basically I need to iterate over all cache partitions on all grid > nodes, > > > compute some function on each key-value pair and return aggregated > result > > > to a caller. > > > > > > This is a job for map-reduce API. > > > > > > But it seems where is no possibility to easily manage automatic routing > > and > > > failover of compute jobs to data nodes containing specific partitions. > > > > > > I found interesting paragraph in javadoc for @AffinityKeyMapped > > annotation. > > > > > > Collocating Computations And Data > > > It is also possible to route computations to the nodes where the data > is > > > cached. This concept is otherwise known as Collocation Of Computations > > And > > > Data .... > > > > > > which makes strong sense for me. > > > > > > But in fact this is not working. Instead we only have automatic > > routing(and > > > failover) for special cases: affinityCall and affinityRun with explicit > > > partition. And it seems I can't longer use task sessions for them with > > > recent changes in Compute API (removed withAsync support) > > > > > > I think this is not OK and we should allow jobs to be automatically > > routed > > > to data if they have some annotation attached to them specifying > > partition > > > and cache names, same as for affinityCall/Run. Probably we should > > introduce > > > special task type for such workflows, something like > AffinityComputeTask, > > > without explicit mapping phase, for convenient usage. > > > > > > I'm willing to make a JIRA ticket for this. > > > > > > Thoughs ? > > > > > > -- > > > > > > Best regards, > > > Alexei Scherbakov > > > > > > > > > -- > > Best regards, > Alexei Scherbakov >
