On 12/13/2013 03:49 PM, Galder Zamarreño wrote: > On Dec 6, 2013, at 4:17 PM, Radim Vansa <rva...@redhat.com> wrote: > >> Btw., when Hot Rod fails to hit the primary owner, should the non-owner >> propagate the SourceID to primary owner somehow? Or is in this case >> acceptable notifying the listener about its own change? > If the call lands in a non-owner, it's probably simpler for the non-owner to > send the notification there and then. ACK information tracking would probably > be distributed, in which case it'd need to deal with potential failure of the > primary owner.
I don't think I understand that properly. The node responsible for notifying the client is either primary owner, or operation origin (where the write has landed in fact). Previously, we were saying that the responsible node should be the primary owner - now you say that the origin. When the cluster is accessed only remotely, it does not have much performance impact (as these two are mostly the same node), but with cluster in compatibility mode the decision could affect the performance a lot. So, do you think that this should be the origin (easier to implement, with access to distributed ack registry it can retrieve the information, but with higher latency as the ack info is probably affine to the entry itself) or primary owner (in this case you'd have to propagate the source ID with the write command). Btw., what should be the source ID for operations coming from library mode? JGroups address of the node? Radim > > Cheers, > -- > Galder Zamarreño > gal...@redhat.com > twitter.com/galderz > > Project Lead, Escalante > http://escalante.io > > Engineer, Infinispan > http://infinispan.org > -- Radim Vansa <rva...@redhat.com> JBoss DataGrid QA _______________________________________________ infinispan-dev mailing list infinispan-dev@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev
