Re: Write behind and eventual consistency

If it's this kind of batch processing, and if you're still waiting for a batch to be processed completely before the next one can be processed, why do you want to use write-behind? What is wrong with sync write-through in this case? -Val -- View this message in context:

Re: Write behind and eventual consistency

Any updates on the two use cases mentioned above? On Apr 27, 2017 10:53 AM, "Gaurav Bajaj" wrote: > Hi Val, > > Our use case : > > 1. Read records from file > 2. Do computations on each record > 3. Put them in the cache and persistence using write behind. > 4. When all

Re: Write behind and eventual consistency

Hi Val, Our use case : 1. Read records from file 2. Do computations on each record 3. Put them in the cache and persistence using write behind. 4. When all the records from file are processed, updated in Cache and also persisted to DB, we want to trigger some other process which will do next

RE: Write behind and eventual consistency

Hi Val, the use case is the following 1) Load data into the database from an external system 2) Once ready load it into the grid 3) Process something that does massive write behinds 4) Take a snapshot of the results (or) Do a backup of the tables <<--- At this point I need the eventual

RE: Write behind and eventual consistency

Hi Steve, What is the business use case behind this? -Val -- View this message in context: http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/Write-behind-and-eventual-consistency-tp12242p12285.html Sent from the Apache Ignite Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

RE: Write behind and eventual consistency

Hello Val, Thanks for your help. Don't you think that this would be an interesting functionality? Steve -Original Message- From: vkulichenko [mailto:valentin.kuliche...@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 26, 2017 9:57 AM To: user@ignite.apache.org Subject: Re: Write behind and eventual

Re: Write behind and eventual consistency

There is no way to do this. However, you can take a look at GridCacheWriteBehindStore which implements this functionality and try tweaking it so that the queue size is exposed somehow. -Val -- View this message in context:

Re: Write behind and eventual consistency

Hello,Assuming there is no more jobs or tasks going (that I csn comtrol from an application perspective) I would like to know when the database is in sync with the caches. Otherwise I cannot get a coherent snapshot. Knowing that there is no jobs ongoing and the queue is empty would be enough. How

Re: Write behind and eventual consistency

Hi Steve, I don't think it's currently possible and frankly I'm not sure I understand what it actually means. Can you clarify what is implied in "no more write behind operations waiting for completion"? We could probably check if the queue is empty, but what if new updates happen right after or