Re: Overall desgn question
With replicated cache you don't need to collocate. You can try both approaches - a single cache for documents that have nested collection of pages, or two separate caches for documents and pages. -Val -- View this message in context: http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/Overall-desgn-question-tp7459p7613.html Sent from the Apache Ignite Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: Overall desgn question
Thank you for the response. Does this approach make sense if we are going to be in replicated mode. We will not be using partition mode. -- View this message in context: http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/Overall-desgn-question-tp7459p7611.html Sent from the Apache Ignite Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: Overall desgn question
Cache per document doesn't make much sense. I was talking about cache per data type. Ideally, you should split Document and Page objects (instead of creating a nested map within the document), store each page as a separate document and use collocation [1] to make sure that all pages are stored next to corresponding documents. In this case you will end up with two caches - one for documents and another for pages. You can then join them using SQL queries [2]. [1] https://apacheignite.readme.io/docs/affinity-collocation#collocate-data-with-data [2] https://apacheignite.readme.io/docs/sql-queries#cross-cache-queries -Val -- View this message in context: http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/Overall-desgn-question-tp7459p7495.html Sent from the Apache Ignite Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: Overall desgn question
One performance question we had would be serialization. If we do a cache per document strategy we were thinking the serialization cost would be less rather than having to go thru serialization of the entire nested HashMap. Again we are going to use Off Heap in replicated mode. -- View this message in context: http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/Overall-desgn-question-tp7459p7490.html Sent from the Apache Ignite Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: Overall desgn question
Thanks for the response. At our peak we could have around 1000 documents cached. We can go with a cache per document design or a design with one named cache and add the document to the cache along with a nested hash map representing the pages. IgniteCache> Are there any performance considerations between a cache per document or one cache with a nested HashMap? Based on your previous response at peak it looks like we could be adding 2 gig of heap space by going with a Cache Per Document design. So memory utilization would be lower with the one named cache approach just was wondering if there are any performance considerations between the two approaches -- View this message in context: http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/Overall-desgn-question-tp7459p7488.html Sent from the Apache Ignite Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: Overall desgn question
Hi Scott, How many caches are you going to have? Basically, the recommended way is to have a cache per data type - this makes life easier in most cases. But keep in mind that each cache will require around 20MB of *heap* memory per node for its internals. So hundreds of caches can introduce high memory consumption and you may consider merging some caches in this case. -Val -- View this message in context: http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/Overall-desgn-question-tp7459p7466.html Sent from the Apache Ignite Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
