Hello!

I suggest parametrizing it with platformId, to make it possible to
implement in e.g. C++ later without creating yet another parameter. Maybe
we can migrate Java near caches to same mechanism in the future.

Why would enabling it affect mixed clusters?

Regards,
-- 
Ilya Kasnacheev


вт, 18 февр. 2020 г. в 15:05, Pavel Tupitsyn <ptupit...@apache.org>:

> Igor,
>
> The problem is - we need to pass this flag around the cluster for Server
> Near Caches,
> so that .NET near caches are started accordingly.
>
> There are 2 kinds of Near Caches:
> - On client nodes: created on every client node separately by calling
> ignite.CreateNearCache
> - On server nodes: created on all server nodes if
> CacheConfiguration.NearCacheConfiguration is set
>
> When user says ignite.CreateCache(new CacheConfiguration
> {NearCacheConfiguration = ...}),
> the whole config is sent to all server nodes, and .NET-specific flag has to
> be included somehow.
>
> On Tue, Feb 18, 2020 at 2:59 PM Igor Sapego <isap...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > Do you suggest to introduce it in general configuration? Why not
> introduce
> > it only on platform side? Is there any .NET-specific configuration?
> >
> > Best Regards,
> > Igor
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Feb 18, 2020 at 1:10 AM Pavel Tupitsyn <ptupit...@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Igniters,
> > >
> > > I'm working on .NET Near Cache feature [1]
> > > (storing deserialized cache entries in CLR memory to improve
> > performance).
> > >
> > > Implementation is based on Java near cache, with some callbacks to .NET
> > > side
> > > for updating and invalidating cached entries.
> > >
> > > However, I'd like to make this feature optional: enabling Java near
> cache
> > > should not
> > > always enable .NET near cache - some users may have mixed clusters,
> etc.
> > >
> > > Therefore I'm adding NearCacheConfiguration#platformNearCacheEnabled
> > > boolean flag.
> > > Are there any objections or better ideas to configure this behavior?
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Pavel
> > >
> > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12691
> > >
> >
>

Reply via email to