Created a ticket and mapped to 3.0 version, as it changes basic default
behavior:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-9011
Thanks!
13.07.2018 22:10, Valentin Kulichenko пишет:
Dmitry,
Good point. I think it makes sense to even remove (deprecate) the
excludeNeighbors property and always distribute primary and backups to
different physical hosts in this scenario. Because why would anyone ever
set this to false if we switch default to true? This also automatically
fixes the confusing behavior of backupFilter - it should never be ignored
if it's set.
-Val
On Fri, Jul 13, 2018 at 8:05 AM Dmitry Karachentsev <
dkarachent...@gridgain.com> wrote:
Hi folks,
Why RendezvousAffinityFunction.excludeNeighbors [1] is false by default?
It's not obvious that if user wants to run more than one node per
machine it has also set this flag to true explicitly. Maybe it would be
better to set it to true by default?
At the same time if excludeNeighbors is true, it ignores backupFilter.
Why it's not vice-versa? For example:
1) if backupFilter is set - it will be used,
2) if there are not enough backup nodes (or no backupFilter) - try to
distribute according to excludeNeighbors = true,
3) if this is not possible too (or excludeNeighbors) = false - assign
partitions as possible.
[1]
https://ignite.apache.org/releases/latest/javadoc/org/apache/ignite/cache/affinity/rendezvous/RendezvousAffinityFunction.html#setExcludeNeighbors-boolean-
Are there any drawbacks in such approach?
Thanks!
