Re: Affinity and String key (was: SQLQuery with simple Join return no results)
Hi Roger,
Please see inline
> On Sep 5, 2017, at 9:44 AM, Roger Fischer (CW) wrote:
>
> Hi Denis,
>
> I don’t quite understand your comment “If you use Strings as the keys you
> won’t get affinity collocation set up properly”.
>
> I have an object with a plain String key, named switchId, and another object
> with a composite key, of which one field is switchId (of type String). I am
> using switchId as the affinity key, and it seems to work fine without
> distributed queries. Was this a coincident and I should re-test?
>
Your understanding is correct. I thought you didn’t use the composite key.
> My understanding is that caches with no explicit affinity key use the key to
> distribute objects. For the plain-key cache this would be switchId.
>
> So, if I have two caches, both with switchId as the key, I should get
> automatic collocation (no setup required). Correct?
>
Yes if the AffinityFunction is the same across the caches.
> And for the third cache, with the switchId field in the composite key as the
> affinity key, I should also get collocation (with the other two caches).
> Correct?
Yes
>
> What am I missing?
Make sure cacheKeyConfiguration is set for every cache cache with the affinity
key you have. Alternatively you can try @AffinityKeyMapped annotation by
labeling required field. If nothing works please share a reproducer via GitHub
with us.
>
> BTW, I think there was a typo in the response (first sentence), and you meant
> to say “set up properly and _non_-distributed joins will return an incomplete
> result.”.
>
I meant _collocated_ joins. In Ignite all the joins are considered to be
distributed in a sense that queries are executed in the distributed fashion.
—
Denis
> Roger
>
> PS: My configuration (all XML):
>
>
>
>
>
> value="com.abc.poc.inppoc.model.PortKey"/>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> class="org.apache.ignite.configuration.CacheConfiguration">
>
>
>
>
>
>
> class="org.apache.ignite.cache.affinity.rendezvous.RendezvousAffinityFunction">
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> value="com.abc.poc.inppoc.model.PortKey"/>
> value="com.abc.poc.inppoc.model.Port"/>
>
> …
>
>
>
> class="org.apache.ignite.configuration.CacheConfiguration">
>
>
>
>
>
>
> class="org.apache.ignite.cache.affinity.rendezvous.RendezvousAffinityFunction">
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> value="java.util.UUID"/>
> value="com.brocade.poc.inppoc.model.Switch"/>
>
> …
>
> PortKey.java:
>
> public class PortKey implements Serializable {
>
> private UUIDid;// port-id; PK
> private UUIDswitchId; // affinity key; not really part of PK
>
> …
>
>
>
> From: Denis Magda [mailto:dma...@apache.org <mailto:dma...@apache.org>]
> Sent: Friday, September 01, 2017 3:07 PM
> To: user@ignite.apache.org <mailto:user@ignite.apache.org>
> Subject: Re: SQLQuery with simple Join return no results
>
> If you use Strings as the keys you won’t get affinity collocation set up
> properly and distributed joins will return an incomplete result. One of the
> keys have to comprise a “parent” class key that will be an affinity key. Look
> at the example here:
> https://apacheignite.readme.io/docs/affinity-collocation#section-collocate-data-with-data
>
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__apacheignite.readme.io_docs_affinity-2Dcollocation-23section-2Dcollocate-2Ddata-2Dwith-2Ddata&d=DwMFaQ&c=IL_XqQWOjubgfqINi2jTzg&a
Affinity and String key (was: SQLQuery with simple Join return no results)
Hi Denis,
I don’t quite understand your comment “If you use Strings as the keys you won’t
get affinity collocation set up properly”.
I have an object with a plain String key, named switchId, and another object
with a composite key, of which one field is switchId (of type String). I am
using switchId as the affinity key, and it seems to work fine without
distributed queries. Was this a coincident and I should re-test?
My understanding is that caches with no explicit affinity key use the key to
distribute objects. For the plain-key cache this would be switchId.
So, if I have two caches, both with switchId as the key, I should get automatic
collocation (no setup required). Correct?
And for the third cache, with the switchId field in the composite key as the
affinity key, I should also get collocation (with the other two caches).
Correct?
What am I missing?
BTW, I think there was a typo in the response (first sentence), and you meant
to say “set up properly and _non_-distributed joins will return an incomplete
result.”.
Roger
PS: My configuration (all XML):
…
…
PortKey.java:
public class PortKey implements Serializable {
private UUIDid;// port-id; PK
private UUIDswitchId; // affinity key; not really part of PK
…
From: Denis Magda [mailto:dma...@apache.org]
Sent: Friday, September 01, 2017 3:07 PM
To: user@ignite.apache.org
Subject: Re: SQLQuery with simple Join return no results
If you use Strings as the keys you won’t get affinity collocation set up
properly and distributed joins will return an incomplete result. One of the
keys have to comprise a “parent” class key that will be an affinity key. Look
at the example here:
https://apacheignite.readme.io/docs/affinity-collocation#section-collocate-data-with-data<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__apacheignite.readme.io_docs_affinity-2Dcollocation-23section-2Dcollocate-2Ddata-2Dwith-2Ddata&d=DwMFaQ&c=IL_XqQWOjubgfqINi2jTzg&r=1esZO0r0bYS90lcsaLA6N4AFxuNo6lzauhETGwdJQoQ&m=KTlx1Z0HYXpMSZKonCG-plYFaijMpCt0OUS3tJgKbWQ&s=-YW5SFh-ko4-_EBwKFMKH5BOJU7pGcQMqaCRZrwZz24&e=>
As for the NON collocated joins suggested by Roger (qry.setDistributedJoins(
true)), I would use them only if it’s impossible to set up the collocation
between 2 entities. That’s not your case from what I see. NON collocated joins
are slower than collocated ones.
—
Denis
On Sep 1, 2017, at 2:53 PM, Roger Fischer (CW)
mailto:rfis...@brocade.com>> wrote:
Hi Matt,
are the objects to join collocated, ie. do they have the same affinity key? If
yes, it should work (it worked for me).
If no, you need to enable distributed joins for the query. See the middle line.
SqlFieldsQuery qry = new SqlFieldsQuery( stmt);
qry.setDistributedJoins( true);
queryCursor = aCache.query( qry);
Roger
-Original Message-
From: matt [mailto:goodie...@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, September 01, 2017 1:52 PM
To: user@ignite.apache.org<mailto:user@ignite.apache.org>
Subject: SQLQuery with simple Join return no results
I have 2 caches defined, both with String keys, and classes that make use of
the Ignite annotations for indexes and affinity. I've got 3 different nodes
running, and the code I'm using to populate the cache w/test data works, and I
can see each node is updated with its share of the data. My index types are set
on the caches as well.
If I do a ScanQuery, I can see that all of the fields and IDs are correct,
Ignite returns them all. But when doing a SqlQuery, I get nothing back.
Ignite is not complaining about the query, it's just returning an empty cursor.
If I remove the Join, results are returned.
So I'm wondering if this is related to the way I've set up my affinity mapping.
It's basically setup like the code below... and the query
Re: SQLQuery with simple Join return no results
Yes, this one of the ways. Denis On Friday, September 1, 2017, matt wrote: > OK thanks for that. So does that then mean that the key type (K) for my > Cache > needs to be AffinityKey ? > > > > -- > Sent from: http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/ >
Re: SQLQuery with simple Join return no results
OK thanks for that. So does that then mean that the key type (K) for my Cache needs to be AffinityKey ? -- Sent from: http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/
Re: SQLQuery with simple Join return no results
If you use Strings as the keys you won’t get affinity collocation set up
properly and distributed joins will return an incomplete result. One of the
keys have to comprise a “parent” class key that will be an affinity key. Look
at the example here:
https://apacheignite.readme.io/docs/affinity-collocation#section-collocate-data-with-data
<https://apacheignite.readme.io/docs/affinity-collocation#section-collocate-data-with-data>
As for the NON collocated joins suggested by Roger (qry.setDistributedJoins(
true)), I would use them only if it’s impossible to set up the collocation
between 2 entities. That’s not your case from what I see. NON collocated joins
are slower than collocated ones.
—
Denis
> On Sep 1, 2017, at 2:53 PM, Roger Fischer (CW) wrote:
>
> Hi Matt,
>
> are the objects to join collocated, ie. do they have the same affinity key?
> If yes, it should work (it worked for me).
>
> If no, you need to enable distributed joins for the query. See the middle
> line.
>
>SqlFieldsQuery qry = new SqlFieldsQuery( stmt);
>qry.setDistributedJoins( true);
>queryCursor = aCache.query( qry);
>
> Roger
>
> -Original Message-
> From: matt [mailto:goodie...@gmail.com <mailto:goodie...@gmail.com>]
> Sent: Friday, September 01, 2017 1:52 PM
> To: user@ignite.apache.org <mailto:user@ignite.apache.org>
> Subject: SQLQuery with simple Join return no results
>
> I have 2 caches defined, both with String keys, and classes that make use of
> the Ignite annotations for indexes and affinity. I've got 3 different nodes
> running, and the code I'm using to populate the cache w/test data works, and
> I can see each node is updated with its share of the data. My index types are
> set on the caches as well.
>
> If I do a ScanQuery, I can see that all of the fields and IDs are correct,
> Ignite returns them all. But when doing a SqlQuery, I get nothing back.
> Ignite is not complaining about the query, it's just returning an empty
> cursor.
>
> If I remove the Join, results are returned.
>
> So I'm wondering if this is related to the way I've set up my affinity
> mapping. It's basically setup like the code below... and the query looks like
> this:
>
> "from B, A WHERE B.id = A.bID"
>
> Any ideas on what I'm doing wrong here?
>
> class A implements Serializable {
> @QuerySqlField(index = true)
> String id;
>
> @QuerySqlField(index = true)
> String bId;
>
> @AffinityKeyMapped
> @QuerySqlField(index = true)
> String group;
> }
>
> class B implements Serializable {
> @QuerySqlField(index = true)
> String id;
>
> @AffinityKeyMapped
> @QuerySqlField(index = true)
> String group;
> }
>
>
>
> --
> Sent from:
> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__apache-2Dignite-2Dusers.70518.x6.nabble.com_&d=DwICAg&c=IL_XqQWOjubgfqINi2jTzg&r=1esZO0r0bYS90lcsaLA6N4AFxuNo6lzauhETGwdJQoQ&m=g9B7o3WZd7LuW39MRFWdU5Gim1S3DRPZGcugI0n9Wno&s=ehBogkdblpG8U9N0taPx5Jdf8G9uDMnZiRR-f34rEe0&e=
>
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__apache-2Dignite-2Dusers.70518.x6.nabble.com_&d=DwICAg&c=IL_XqQWOjubgfqINi2jTzg&r=1esZO0r0bYS90lcsaLA6N4AFxuNo6lzauhETGwdJQoQ&m=g9B7o3WZd7LuW39MRFWdU5Gim1S3DRPZGcugI0n9Wno&s=ehBogkdblpG8U9N0taPx5Jdf8G9uDMnZiRR-f34rEe0&e=>
RE: SQLQuery with simple Join return no results
Hi Matt,
are the objects to join collocated, ie. do they have the same affinity key? If
yes, it should work (it worked for me).
If no, you need to enable distributed joins for the query. See the middle line.
SqlFieldsQuery qry = new SqlFieldsQuery( stmt);
qry.setDistributedJoins( true);
queryCursor = aCache.query( qry);
Roger
-Original Message-
From: matt [mailto:goodie...@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, September 01, 2017 1:52 PM
To: user@ignite.apache.org
Subject: SQLQuery with simple Join return no results
I have 2 caches defined, both with String keys, and classes that make use of
the Ignite annotations for indexes and affinity. I've got 3 different nodes
running, and the code I'm using to populate the cache w/test data works, and I
can see each node is updated with its share of the data. My index types are set
on the caches as well.
If I do a ScanQuery, I can see that all of the fields and IDs are correct,
Ignite returns them all. But when doing a SqlQuery, I get nothing back.
Ignite is not complaining about the query, it's just returning an empty cursor.
If I remove the Join, results are returned.
So I'm wondering if this is related to the way I've set up my affinity mapping.
It's basically setup like the code below... and the query looks like this:
"from B, A WHERE B.id = A.bID"
Any ideas on what I'm doing wrong here?
class A implements Serializable {
@QuerySqlField(index = true)
String id;
@QuerySqlField(index = true)
String bId;
@AffinityKeyMapped
@QuerySqlField(index = true)
String group;
}
class B implements Serializable {
@QuerySqlField(index = true)
String id;
@AffinityKeyMapped
@QuerySqlField(index = true)
String group;
}
--
Sent from:
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__apache-2Dignite-2Dusers.70518.x6.nabble.com_&d=DwICAg&c=IL_XqQWOjubgfqINi2jTzg&r=1esZO0r0bYS90lcsaLA6N4AFxuNo6lzauhETGwdJQoQ&m=g9B7o3WZd7LuW39MRFWdU5Gim1S3DRPZGcugI0n9Wno&s=ehBogkdblpG8U9N0taPx5Jdf8G9uDMnZiRR-f34rEe0&e=
SQLQuery with simple Join return no results
I have 2 caches defined, both with String keys, and classes that make use of
the Ignite annotations for indexes and affinity. I've got 3 different nodes
running, and the code I'm using to populate the cache w/test data works, and
I can see each node is updated with its share of the data. My index types
are set on the caches as well.
If I do a ScanQuery, I can see that all of the fields and IDs are correct,
Ignite returns them all. But when doing a SqlQuery, I get nothing back.
Ignite is not complaining about the query, it's just returning an empty
cursor.
If I remove the Join, results are returned.
So I'm wondering if this is related to the way I've set up my affinity
mapping. It's basically setup like the code below... and the query looks
like this:
"from B, A WHERE B.id = A.bID"
Any ideas on what I'm doing wrong here?
class A implements Serializable {
@QuerySqlField(index = true)
String id;
@QuerySqlField(index = true)
String bId;
@AffinityKeyMapped
@QuerySqlField(index = true)
String group;
}
class B implements Serializable {
@QuerySqlField(index = true)
String id;
@AffinityKeyMapped
@QuerySqlField(index = true)
String group;
}
--
Sent from: http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/
