Re: Video overview of eight Ignite-specific talks scheduled for the IMCS Summit 2020
Thank you so much Denis for the Video support. Regards, Saikat On Fri, Oct 16, 2020 at 2:03 PM Alexey Zinoviev wrote: > Thanks for the video support, Denis, shared! > > пт, 16 окт. 2020 г., 21:45 Denis Magda : > >> Igniters, >> >> We've got eight (!!!) Ignite-specific sessions scheduled for the >> In-Memory Computing Summit 2020. I've gone ahead and produced a quick >> overview of those sessions. Check and weigh up which one to join: >> https://youtu.be/SCqd4qfBY6Q >> >> The sessions are delivered by our community folks: @Saikat Maitra >> , @Alexey Zinoviev , >> @Stanislav >> Lukyanov , @Andrey Alexandrov >> , @Glenn Wiebe , @Greg >> Stachnick , me >> >> Support the speakers and share the video within your network. >> >> - >> Denis >> >
Re: Video overview of eight Ignite-specific talks scheduled for the IMCS Summit 2020
Thanks for the video support, Denis, shared! пт, 16 окт. 2020 г., 21:45 Denis Magda : > Igniters, > > We've got eight (!!!) Ignite-specific sessions scheduled for the In-Memory > Computing Summit 2020. I've gone ahead and produced a quick overview of > those sessions. Check and weigh up which one to join: > https://youtu.be/SCqd4qfBY6Q > > The sessions are delivered by our community folks: @Saikat Maitra > , @Alexey Zinoviev , > @Stanislav > Lukyanov , @Andrey Alexandrov > , @Glenn Wiebe , @Greg > Stachnick , me > > Support the speakers and share the video within your network. > > - > Denis >
Re: Continuous query not transactional ?
Hi Ilya, That is what I assume too, could someone from the developers community help confirm/comment on this ? regards, Veena. -- Sent from: http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/
Video overview of eight Ignite-specific talks scheduled for the IMCS Summit 2020
Igniters, We've got eight (!!!) Ignite-specific sessions scheduled for the In-Memory Computing Summit 2020. I've gone ahead and produced a quick overview of those sessions. Check and weigh up which one to join: https://youtu.be/SCqd4qfBY6Q The sessions are delivered by our community folks: @Saikat Maitra , @Alexey Zinoviev , @Stanislav Lukyanov , @Andrey Alexandrov , @Glenn Wiebe , @Greg Stachnick , me Support the speakers and share the video within your network. - Denis
Re: Continuous query not transactional ?
Hello! I'm not sure, but I would assume that changes are visible after commit(), but you can see these changes in any order, and you can see cache a update without cache b update, for example. This is for committed transactions. For rolled back transactions, I don't know. I expect you won't be able to see change as you have described, but won't bet on it. Regards, -- Ilya Kasnacheev чт, 15 окт. 2020 г. в 20:35, VeenaMithare : > Hi , > > This is in continuation of the below statement on this post : > > http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/Lag-before-records-are-visible-after-transaction-commit-tp33787p33861.html > > >>Continuous Query itself is not transactional and it looks like it can't > be > used for this at the moment. So, it gets notification before other entries > were committed. > > Does this mean we could get dirty reads as updates in continuous query ? > i.e. for eg if the code is as below: > 1. Start transaction > 2. update records of cache a > 3. update records of cache b > 4. update records for cache c > 5. commit > > if update of cache a succeeds , but update of cache b fails, will the local > listener for continuous query for 'cache a' get an update ? > > regards, > Veena. > > > regards > Veena. > > > > -- > Sent from: http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/ >
Re: ContinuousQuery Batch updates
Hello!
Then you need to implement your own AffinityFunction by subclassing
RendezvousAffinityFunction.
Regards,
--
Ilya Kasnacheev
вт, 13 окт. 2020 г. в 13:15, ssansoy :
> Hi,
> RE: the custom affinity function, this is what we have:
>
> public class CacheLevelAffinityKeyMapper implements AffinityKeyMapper {
>
> private final Logger LOGGER =
> LoggerFactory.getLogger(CacheLevelAffinityKeyMapper.class);
> @Override
> public Object affinityKey(Object key) {
> if(key instanceof BinaryObject){
> BinaryObject binaryObjectKey = (BinaryObject) key;
> BinaryType binaryType = binaryObjectKey.type();
> LOGGER.trace("Key is {}, binary type is {}", key,
> binaryType.typeName());
> return binaryType.typeName();
> }
> else{
> LOGGER.trace("Key is {}, type is {}", key, key.getClass());
> return key;
> }
> }
>
> The issue was that the interface AffinityKeyMapper is depricated in Ignite
> 2.8.1. Is this the way you would recommend supplying such a custom
> function?
> We can't use the @AffinityKeyMapped annotation because there is no java
> type
> to annotate as such (we use BinaryObjects only)
>
>
>
> --
> Sent from: http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/
>
