I see, and adding this method will mandate creation of the delegate even for data streamer?
Is it a bad tradeoff (known bad tradeoff) for the functionality mentioned? I still feel there might be use case where on the fly streaming is necessary and low number of caches are used (mitigating this concern to a point). On Wed, Jul 1, 2015 at 2:02 PM, Vladimir Ozerov <voze...@gridgain.com> wrote: > For client node it is necessary to perform regular cache operations. > However, data streamer uses completely different logic to perform cache > updates and does not require this delegate. > > On Wed, Jul 1, 2015 at 11:24 AM, Atri Sharma <atri.j...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Could you explain a bit on when is a cache delegate needed? Just trying > to > > understand context here please. > > > > On Wed, Jul 1, 2015 at 1:50 PM, Vladimir Ozerov <voze...@gridgain.com> > > wrote: > > > > > Atri, > > > > > > Currently if user start data streaming on a client for already started > > > cache it doesn't yield in internal cache delegate creation on the > client > > > what saves memory which is very important for client mode. With > proposed > > > change client will always create cache delegate even if it is not > needed. > > > This is why I am -1 for this change. > > > > > > Vladimir. > > > > > > On Wed, Jul 1, 2015 at 10:06 AM, Atri Sharma <atri.j...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > > > > I agree with that but essentially this is same as manually creating > > > before > > > > data streaming. I agree with your point of cache delegation but there > > > might > > > > be usecases where client is fine with this (low number of caches) but > > may > > > > need functionality to automate cache creation when streaming. > > > > > > > > I feel that we should implement this and document memory implications > > of > > > > this so it can be used for needed use cases. > > > > > > > > Thoughts? > > > > > > > > On Wed, Jul 1, 2015 at 12:27 PM, Vladimir Ozerov < > voze...@gridgain.com > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Atri, > > > > > > > > > > I thought a little bit more about this. Calling "getOrCreateCache" > is > > > > not a > > > > > good idea when streamer is called from a client node because it > will > > > lead > > > > > to creating a cache delegate on this node. But with current > approach > > > this > > > > > is not necessary and client node doesn't spent memory on it. > > > > > > > > > > Therefore, I think we should not implement this provided that > > > workaround > > > > > exists: user could call "Ignite.getOrCreateCache" manually before > > > > starting > > > > > data streaming in case it is really needed. > > > > > > > > > > Vladimir. > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 7:20 PM, Atri Sharma <atri.j...@gmail.com> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > I have created IGNITE -1066 for this. > > > > > > > > > > > > Please see and comment. > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 12:36 PM, Atri Sharma < > atri.j...@gmail.com > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think it is a good idea but I wonder if it makes sense to > also > > > > notify > > > > > > to > > > > > > > the user somehow that a cache was created or not by this > > function. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Why I feel that is necessary is because if we are creating > caches > > > > most > > > > > of > > > > > > > the time in the function to the user opaquely, it may lead to > > user > > > > > > > questioning the performance degradation (minor though it may > be) > > > > since > > > > > > > creating a cache will be a tad more expensive than just getting > > it. > > > > It > > > > > > > would be worthwhile to atleast log so we can identify > performance > > > > > issues > > > > > > > later on. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If you are fine I can make ticket and assign it to myself. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 12:01 PM, Vladimir Ozerov < > > > > > voze...@gridgain.com> > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> Igniters, > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> Consider the following use case. > > > > > > >> 1) User configured cache template, but has never accessed it > > > > > explicitly > > > > > > >> yet; > > > > > > >> 2) User calls Ignite.dataStreamer([cacheName]) - exception is > > > thrown > > > > > > >> because cache is not started. > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> I have a feeling that data streamer must have > "getOrCreateCache" > > > > > > semantics > > > > > > >> so that user do not have to pre-start cache explicitly to > start > > > > > loading > > > > > > >> data to it. > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> Thoughts? > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> Vladimir. > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Atri > > > > > > > *l'apprenant* > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > > > > > > > Atri > > > > > > *l'apprenant* > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Regards, > > > > > > > > Atri > > > > *l'apprenant* > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Regards, > > > > Atri > > *l'apprenant* > > > -- Regards, Atri *l'apprenant*
