Val, Guess we're talking about other situations. I'm bringing up the case when a service was deployed dynamically and has to be brought up after a full cluster restart w/o user intervention. To achieve this we need to persist the service's configuration somewhere.
-- Denis On Mon, Apr 9, 2018 at 1:42 PM, Valentin Kulichenko < valentin.kuliche...@gmail.com> wrote: > Denis, > > EVT_CLASS_DEPLOYED should be fired every time a class is deployed or > redeployed. If this doesn't happen in some cases, I believe this would be a > bug. I don't think we need to add any new events. > > -Val > > On Mon, Apr 9, 2018 at 10:50 AM, Denis Magda <dma...@apache.org> wrote: > > > Denis, > > > > I would encourage us to persist a service configuration in the meta store > > and have this capability enabled by default. That's essential for > services > > started dynamically. Moreover, we support similar behavior for caches, > > indexes, and other DDL changes happened at runtime. > > > > -- > > Denis > > > > On Mon, Apr 9, 2018 at 9:34 AM, Denis Mekhanikov <dmekhani...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > > Another question, that I would like to discuss is whether services > should > > > be preserved on cluster restarts. > > > > > > Currently it depends on persistence configuration. If persistence for > any > > > data region is enabled, then services will be persisted as well. This > is > > a > > > pretty strange way of configuring this behaviour. > > > I'm not sure, if anybody relies on this functionality right now. Should > > we > > > support it at all? If yes, should we make it configurable? > > > > > > Denis > > > > > > пн, 9 апр. 2018 г. в 19:27, Denis Mekhanikov <dmekhani...@gmail.com>: > > > > > > > Val, > > > > > > > > Sounds reasonable. I just think, that user should have some way to > > know, > > > > that new version of a service class was deployed. > > > > One way to do it is to listen to *EVT_CLASS_DEPLOYED. *I'm not sure, > > > > whether it is triggered on class redeployment, though. If not, then > > > another > > > > event type should be added. > > > > > > > > I don't think, that a lot of people will implement their own > > > > *DeploymentSpi*-s, so we should make work with *UriDeploymentSpi* as > > > > comfortable as possible. > > > > > > > > Denis > > > > > > > > пт, 6 апр. 2018 г. в 23:40, Valentin Kulichenko < > > > > valentin.kuliche...@gmail.com>: > > > > > > > >> Yes, the class deployment itself has to be explicit. I.e., there has > > to > > > be > > > >> a manual step where user updates the class, and the exact step > > required > > > >> would depend on DeploymentSpi implementation. But then Ignite takes > > care > > > >> of > > > >> everything else - service redeployment and restart is automatic. > > > >> > > > >> Dmitriy Pavlov, all this is going to be disabled if DeploymentSpi is > > not > > > >> configured. In this case service class definitions have to be > deployed > > > on > > > >> local classpath and can't be updated in runtime. Just like it works > > > right > > > >> now. > > > >> > > > >> -Val > > > >> > > > >> On Fri, Apr 6, 2018 at 10:20 AM, Dmitriy Setrakyan < > > > dsetrak...@apache.org > > > >> > > > > >> wrote: > > > >> > > > >> > On Fri, Apr 6, 2018 at 9:13 AM, Dmitry Pavlov < > > dpavlov....@gmail.com> > > > >> > wrote: > > > >> > > > > >> > > Hi Igniters, > > > >> > > > > > >> > > I like automatic redeploy which can be disabled by config if > user > > > >> wants > > > >> > to > > > >> > > control this process. What do you think? > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > I do not think we should have anything automatic when it comes to > > > >> > deployment, everything should be explicit. However, if we use the > > > >> > deployment SPI, then a user should be able to do "hot" redeploy, > > > where a > > > >> > new service will be deployed if the user drops an updated jar. > > > >> > > > > >> > We should not create anything new here. Ignite already has a > > > deployment > > > >> SPI > > > >> > and it already works in a certain way. Let's not change it. > > > >> > > > > >> > D. > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
