Hi Amit, it's expected penalty, ignite is cluster solution that requires fast and reliable network.
Do you need share data between data centers for HA? if so, you can implement your own data center replication: install listener for cache changes, batch data and send them to remote data center, or you can try to google 3dparty solutions for this. Thanks, Mikhail. On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 2:22 AM, Amit Pundir <amitpun...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > I am trying to setup a multi-cloud cluster of Ignite 2.0 servers and facing > severe issues in terms of the response time. I am running Tomcats as Ignite > clients hosting my REST service. > > To narrow down the issue, I tried setting up the cluster in almost all > permutation combinations. > > 1. Two Ignite server nodes each on two clouds Cloud 1 and Cloud 2. > Similarly > two Tomcats are set up on the same 2 clouds each. > 2. Two Ignite server nodes each on two clouds Cloud 1 and Cloud 2. But all > 4 > Tomcats on Cloud 1. > 3. Two Ignite server nodes each on two clouds Cloud 1 and Cloud 2. But all > 4 > Tomcats on Cloud 2. > 4. Four Ignite server nodes each on Cloud 1. But 4 Tomcats split equally on > 2 clouds. > 5. Four Ignite server nodes each on Cloud 1. All 4 Tomcats on same cloud 1. > 6. Four Ignite server nodes each on Cloud 2. All 4 Tomcats on same cloud 2. > > As expected the case 5 and case 6 were the winners hands down but I can't > afford to deploy my application on a single cloud. > > The average response time in case 1 and case 2 is 10 times more than what I > am getting on same cloud. I tried this experiment with 2 clouds hosted in > the same data-center and it was still 8 to 9 times bad than the best case > scenario. > > The round trip time between these 2 clouds is 40 milli-secs and I was > expecting deterioration in the responsive time proportional to the round > trip time but that's not the case. > > I observed the slowest api calls taking around 5 to 12 seconds. The 2 > prominent calls were - > > 1. Ignite transaction commit() > 2. TcpCommunicationSpi#createTcpClient() > > Could you please help me on this issue. > > While trying things out, I have increased the idleTimeout to 60 seconds to > reduce the calls to create new connections. What are the pitfalls of > increasing this timeout? > > Thanks > > > > -- > View this message in context: http://apache-ignite-users. > 70518.x6.nabble.com/Multi-Cloud-Deployment-Issue-tp15092.html > Sent from the Apache Ignite Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > -- Thanks, Mikhail.
