I think you are talking about the case when cluster temporarily gets into unbalanced state and needs to rebalance. However, I am still not sure what this metric would show. Can you provide an example?
D. On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 2:10 PM, Alex Plehanov <plehanov.a...@gmail.com> wrote: > It's not about caches. > Each partition has certain amount of copies. Amount of copies may differ > for different partitions of one cache group. > > This configuration possible: > 1) With custom affinity function > 2) When nodes left the cluster, till rebalancing is not finished > > > > 2017-11-23 0:18 GMT+03:00 Dmitriy Setrakyan <dsetrak...@apache.org>: > > > On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 12:39 PM, Alex Plehanov <plehanov.a...@gmail.com > > > > wrote: > > > > > Hello Dmitriy, > > > > > > I agree. > > > > > > By "minimal partition redundancy level for cache group" I mean minimal > > > number of partition copies among all partitions of this cache group. > > > For example, if we have in our cluster for cache group one partition > > with 2 > > > copies (1 primary and 1 backup) and other partitions with 4 copies (1 > > > primary and 3 backups), then minimal partition redundancy level for > this > > > cache group will be 2. > > > > > > > Such configuration within the same group would be impossible. All caches > > within the same group have identical total number of partitions and > > identical number of backups. If that is not the case, then they fall into > > different groups. > > > > D. > > >
