Well, merged the fix to the branch with the donation and closed the ticket: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-5295 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-5295>
— Denis > On May 26, 2017, at 1:25 PM, Denis Magda <dma...@apache.org> wrote: > > As I see from the AffinityFunction implementations, client nodes are not used > there that implies there is no way to deploy replicated and partitioned > caches there. > > — > Denis > >> On May 26, 2017, at 12:19 PM, Dmitriy Setrakyan <dsetrak...@apache.org> >> wrote: >> >> On Fri, May 26, 2017 at 12:17 PM, Denis Magda <dma...@apache.org> wrote: >> >>> Local and near caches can be configured on clients. But you can still >>> define replicated and partitioned ones in the clients’ configuration and >>> they will be simply ignored. I want us to do the same for the persistent >>> store (simply ignore it if it’s defined in a client’s configuration). >>> >> >> Denis, are you absolutely 100% sure that there is no way to configure >> normal cache on the client nodes? If yes, then I agree with you. >> >> >>> Sounds reasonable? >>> >>> >>> — >>> Denis >>> >>>> On May 26, 2017, at 12:14 PM, Dmitriy Setrakyan <dsetrak...@apache.org> >>> wrote: >>>> >>>> On Fri, May 26, 2017 at 11:59 AM, Denis Magda <dma...@apache.org> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Exactly, you can specify caches in the configuration of both clients and >>>>> servers BUT the caches will be deployed on the servers only. >>>>> This is why it’s absolutely fine to use a single configuration (with >>>>> caches defined) for all your cluster nodes because Ignite can >>> automatically >>>>> figure out what doesn’t make sense for clients and what’s not. >>>>> >>>> >>>> Agree. But it is still possible to configure caches on the client side, >>>> right? All I want is for us to remain consistent and provide identical >>>> behavior with persistence enabled. >>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>> — >>>>> Denis >>>>> >>>>>> On May 26, 2017, at 11:46 AM, Dmitriy Setrakyan <dsetrak...@apache.org >>>> >>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Denis, >>>>>> >>>>>> I think I misunderstand the issue. How do we do it for caches? Caches >>> are >>>>>> only supposed to be enabled on the servers by default. Do we require a >>>>>> different configuration file for clients and servers for the caches? >>>>>> >>>>>> D. >>>>>> >>>>>> On Fri, May 26, 2017 at 11:41 AM, Denis Magda <dma...@apache.org> >>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> I tend to use a single XML configuration for all my cluster nodes >>>>> (servers >>>>>>> and clients). Presently, I forced to create and maintain at least 2. >>>>> This >>>>>>> is the first concern. The second concern is if persistence store has >>> no >>>>>>> effect for the client node why not simply ignore it and not make the >>>>> user >>>>>>> to set MemoryConfiguration explicitly if the goal is to use a single >>> XML >>>>>>> config. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> — >>>>>>> Denis >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On May 26, 2017, at 11:33 AM, Dmitriy Setrakyan < >>> dsetrak...@apache.org >>>>>> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Fri, May 26, 2017 at 11:29 AM, Denis Magda <dma...@apache.org >>>>>>> <mailto:dma...@apache.org>> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Can we just fix the exception >>>>>>>>>> message to clearly state that client mode requires all explicit >>>>>>>>>> configuration for such and such functionality? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I don’t like this. It will require me as a user: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> * have a separate configuration for clients ALL the times. >>>>>>>>> * initialize the memory bean explicitly which looks like a hack and >>>>>>>>> workaround >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> <property name="memoryConfiguration"> >>>>>>>>> <bean class="org.apache.ignite.configuration.MemoryConfiguration"> >>>>>>>>> </bean> >>>>>>>>> </property> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Denis, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Why would you even have a use case for a persistence configuration on >>>>> the >>>>>>>> client side? What happened in your case was a mistake and you should >>>>> have >>>>>>>> received a proper exception. I am simply suggesting that in the odd >>>>> case >>>>>>>> that someone does need it, we provide proper error message explaining >>>>>>>> exactly what needs to be done. Why not? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On May 26, 2017, at 11:02 AM, Dmitriy Setrakyan < >>>>> dsetrak...@apache.org >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I don't like ignoring any configuration, but I do agree that >>> enabling >>>>>>>>>> persistence on the client side seems odd. Can we just fix the >>>>> exception >>>>>>>>>> message to clearly state that client mode requires all explicit >>>>>>>>>> configuration for such and such functionality? >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> D. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Fri, May 26, 2017 at 10:34 AM, Sergey Chugunov < >>>>>>>>> sergey.chugu...@gmail.com >>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Denis, >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Thanks for quick reply, >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> I made a change and tested it with your example, everything looks >>>>>>> fine. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Pull request is open and available at [1] >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> [1] https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/2016 >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, May 26, 2017 at 8:25 PM, Denis Magda <dma...@apache.org> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> I would suggest on the first iteration to simply ignore >>>>> persistence >>>>>>>>>>>>> configuration on client nodes. >>>>>>>>>>>>> If client node finds persistence configuration on startup it >>> will >>>>>>>>>>>> printout >>>>>>>>>>>>> warning message to log and proceed without persistence. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> +1 for this. Otherwise, it looks like a dirty hack when I need to >>>>> add >>>>>>>>> an >>>>>>>>>>>> empty MemoryConfiguration to a client config file. Plus, it >>>>> requires >>>>>>> us >>>>>>>>>>> to >>>>>>>>>>>> create different configuration files for servers and clients >>> which >>>>>>> has >>>>>>>>> to >>>>>>>>>>>> be optional by default. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> — >>>>>>>>>>>> Denis >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On May 26, 2017, at 9:50 AM, Sergey Chugunov < >>>>>>>>>>> sergey.chugu...@gmail.com> >>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Moreover, enabling persistence on client node is very risky and >>>>> may >>>>>>>>>>> lead >>>>>>>>>>>> to >>>>>>>>>>>>> many tricky cases. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> I would suggest on the first iteration to simply ignore >>>>> persistence >>>>>>>>>>>>> configuration on client nodes. >>>>>>>>>>>>> If client node finds persistence configuration on startup it >>> will >>>>>>>>>>>> printout >>>>>>>>>>>>> warning message to log and proceed without persistence. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Supporting persistence on client nodes definitely requires more >>>>>>>>>>>> thoughtful >>>>>>>>>>>>> discussion and may be added in the future. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>>>>>>> Sergey. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, May 26, 2017 at 7:28 PM, Sergey Chugunov < >>>>>>>>>>>> sergey.chugu...@gmail.com> >>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Denis, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I see from example that you're trying to start a client node >>> with >>>>>>>>>>>>>> persistence configuration specified and you're saying that >>> Ignite >>>>>>>>> must >>>>>>>>>>>>>> provide default MemoryConfiguration. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> But that contradicts with decision we all agreed on in the >>>>>>>>>>>> discussion[1]: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> if user wants to do something unusual on client nodes like >>>>> storing >>>>>>>>>>> cache >>>>>>>>>>>>>> partitions (or in this case persisting stuff) he/she *must >>>>> *provide >>>>>>>>>>> all >>>>>>>>>>>>>> necessary configuration explicitly. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Server node with the same persistence configuration (and >>> without >>>>>>>>>>>> explicit >>>>>>>>>>>>>> memory configuration) starts just fine. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> [1] http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> com/Question-local-cache-on-client-nodes-tt15950.html >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sergey. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, May 26, 2017 at 7:03 PM, Denis Magda < >>> dma...@apache.org> >>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sergey, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The issue vanishes as soon as I add the following to the >>>>>>>>>>> configuration: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <property name="memoryConfiguration"> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <bean class="org.apache.ignite.configuration. >>>>>>>>>>> MemoryConfiguration"> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> </bean> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> </property> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> My point is that we just need to create a MemoryConfiguration >>>>>>>>>>>> implicitly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> if it’s not defined (no any warnings or extra messages). It’s >>> a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> responsibility of our platform to generate a default >>>>> configuration >>>>>>>>> if >>>>>>>>>>>> it’s >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not set explicitly. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> — >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Denis >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On May 26, 2017, at 8:46 AM, Sergey Chugunov < >>>>>>>>>>>> sergey.chugu...@gmail.com> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Denis, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> What is the expected behavior in that case? Bug doesn't >>> suggest >>>>>>>>> any. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> From my point of view it would be better to throw an >>> exception >>>>> on >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> startup >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with meaningful message than to silently create a default >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> MemoryConfiguration under the cover. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sergey. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, May 26, 2017 at 4:00 AM, Denis Magda < >>>>> dma...@apache.org> >>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Igniters, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I’ve just added the first Persistent Store example to the >>>>> branch >>>>>>>>>>> that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fosters the donation: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/ignite/tree/ignite-5267/ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> examples/src/main/java/org/apache/ignite/examples/ >>>>>>> persistentstore >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> However, the example fails with an NPE if a >>>>> MemoryConfiguration >>>>>>> is >>>>>>>>>>>> not >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> defined explicitly: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-5295 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please those who are involved in the store development fix >>> the >>>>>>>>>>> issue >>>>>>>>>>>> by >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the end of tomorrow. I want to complete with the technical >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> documentation >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> referring to a workable example. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> — >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Denis >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>> >>> >
