Write Behind slowing down performance greatly

I observed that turning on writeThrough with writeBehind slows down performance(i.e. time data reaches listeners) greatly. I tried setting the flush frequency to 0 and the flush size to 1 billion, and so the flushes are not even happening yet, and still the performance is slow. I am wondering

Re: Minimal config for client nodes

Thank you! My idea was to automate the configuration for the client nodes, so that the configuration was a mirror of that of the servers, minus the unnecessary stuff. I'll work it out a little bit then, thanks. -- Sent from: http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/

Re: Sorting result of ScanQuery

That's my concern. Because the requirements I have is persisting an Object with a complex nested structure, which can't be changed. I mean the class files can not be changed. Creating Data transfer objects and mapping between them is fine. But what we want to achieve is a really high write rate

Re: Minimal config for client nodes

Hello! I don't think there is a complete list or something similar somewhere thus it’s better to check this manually. Regarding the peerClassLoading and similar configuration you might check the source code

Re: Sorting result of ScanQuery

You can store collections in Ignite, the challenge is they’re effectively invisible to SQL. In general it’s easiest to work with data in relational structure. Ignite isn’t a document database. > On 3 Jun 2021, at 12:52, Taner Ilyazov wrote: > > Okay, but since the nested object structure

ignite server restarted after Critical system error detected.

Hi Ignitians, I fail to understand what causes and need your help - 1) When k8s sees “Critical system error”, it will restart ignite-admin server. Restarting is fine because of the critical system error. But what are the causes of the critical system error? 2) Critical system error

Re: Sorting result of ScanQuery

Okay, but since the nested object structure that I have contains a Map, for which the idea is to have dynamic values, I'm not sure how it will be handled. Do I need to create a separate table to do the mapping of said Map<>? Couldn't find an example mapping a query entity entry to a parameterized

Re: Ignite throws "Failed to resolve class name" Exception

Hello! It seems that you are trying to deploy DTO using peer class loading, unfortunately, that's not possible. Peer class loading is mostly about task deployment, see https://ignite.apache.org/docs/latest/code-deployment/peer-class-loading To resolve this you need to have your CacheState

Minimal config for client nodes

Hello everybody. I'm trying to figure out the minimum configuration to pass to the client nodes. I thought, client nodes don't need all configuration of data regions, configuration of memory, persistence, consistendId, etc. I thought, once I made a minimum configuration, where at most I indicated

Clients got disconnected during the endurance testing

HI All We are using Ignite 2.8.1 and carrying the endurance test lasting for 7 to 12 hours. Test ran for almost 6 hours and all of a sudden clients got disconnected and seeing the below logs what could be the reason for this behavior, we have enough resources like RAM, CPU during that time