Go for it, Vladimir!
> 31 янв. 2020 г., в 16:15, Vladimir Steshin <vlads...@gmail.com> написал(а):
>
> Hi folks. I created a ticket for this (IGNITE-12614):
>
>
>
> ----
>
> Currently, anyone is able to silently deactivate cluster with command line
> utility (control.sh). Probably with JMX too. Same for the API: Java API –
> Ignite.cluster.state(). That would lead to data loss when the persistence
> is off. In-memory data is erased during deactivation. Such behavior can be
> considered as unexpected to user.
>
> Suggestions for the CLI/JMX:
>
> 1) disallow silent deactivation of cluster keeping caches. Show a warning
> like “Your cluster has in-memory cache configured. During deactivation all
> data from these caches will be cleared!”
>
> 2) Add param ‘--force’ which skips the warning message.
>
> -----
>
> Going to fix the problem if there are no disagreement
> <https://www.linguee.com/english-russian/translation/disagreement.html>s
>
> пт, 31 янв. 2020 г. в 13:17, Ivan Pavlukhin <vololo...@gmail.com>:
>
>> For me it looks like some coincidence effect. I understand that we get
>> such behavior because deactivation works the same way as for
>> persistent caches. Was cluster activation/deactivation designed and
>> described for in-memory caches? Current behavior sounds for me a as
>> big risk. I expect a lot of upset users unexpectedly purged all their
>> data.
>>
>> пт, 31 янв. 2020 г. в 00:00, Alexey Goncharuk <alexey.goncha...@gmail.com
>>> :
>>>
>>> Because originally the sole purpose of deactivation was resource
>>> deallocation.
>>>
>>> чт, 30 янв. 2020 г. в 22:13, Denis Magda <dma...@apache.org>:
>>>
>>>> Such a revelation for me that data is purged from RAM if someone
>>>> deactivates the cluster. Alex, do you remember why we decided to
>> implement
>>>> it this way initially?
>>>>
>>>> -
>>>> Denis
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Jan 30, 2020 at 2:09 AM Alexey Goncharuk <
>>>> alexey.goncha...@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I agree on CLI and JMX because those interfaces can be used by a
>> system
>>>>> administrator and can be invoked by mistake.
>>>>>
>>>>> As for the Java API, personally, I find it strange to add 'force' or
>>>>> 'confirm' flags to it because it is very unlikely that such an
>> invocation
>>>>> is done by mistake. Such mistakes are caught during the testing
>> phase and
>>>>> developers will end up hard-coding 'true' as a flag anyways.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Best regards,
>> Ivan Pavlukhin
>>
