Hi Roman, Thanks for your comments! Yes, at the beginning I considered using a single class for two types of records. But it is confusing, as you're correctly noticed. I reworked IEP, now there are 2 different classes, and both contain a list of transactions to include. Also I added info about when those WAL records are actually written to 'WAL records' sections. Please, have a look.
Thanks, Maksim On Thu, May 26, 2022 at 2:54 PM Roman Puchkovskiy < roman.puchkovs...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Maksim. > > Do I understand correctly that 'consistent cut start' message always > contains IDs of transactions to include, while 'consistent cut finish' > message always contains IDs of transactions to exclude from the > consistent cut? (At least, this is the impression I got from the > example of parsing the WAL and the accompanying figure). If this is > the case, then it looks like the `include` and `check` fields are > mutually exclusive in ConsistentCutRecord. Would it make sense to > replace it with two classes, like ConsistentCutStartRecord(cutVer, > include) and ConsistentCutFinishRecord(cutVer, exclude)? > > Also, it seems that it could be beneficial to have a separate section > explaining when the corresponding records are written to WAL, to make > this information easier to find. Or, maybe, this could be added to the > current 'WAL records' section. > > пн, 16 мая 2022 г. в 12:52, Maksim Timonin <timoninma...@apache.org>: > > > > Dear Igniters, > > > > I just published IEP-89 [1] that proposes a new feature to Ignite - > (point > > in time recovery) PITR. I propose to implement the Consistent Cut > algorithm > > for this, actually I achieved a working PoC for Ignite. And based on my > > research I wrote this IEP. > > > > Let's start a discussion here. Any questions or comments are welcomed. > > > > Thanks! > > > > > > [1] > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=211884314 >
