Re: Applicability of term 'cache' to Apache Ignite

I cast my vote for the "table". This term is generic, well-understood and naturally fits SQL-intensive use cases. Basically, we don't need to reinvent the wheel and the "table" aligns with our internal storage structure proposed for 3.0. Vladimir Ozerov's thoughts down below this discussion thread

Re: Applicability of term 'cache' to Apache Ignite

Igniters, I would like to resurrect this discussion, as we have a chance to make the change in Ignite 3.0. The 'cache' term is clearly outdated and does not describe the functionality of Ignite. It looks like the term 'table' got the most support so far, and I think it quite accurately describes

Re: Applicability of term 'cache' to Apache Ignite

I am beginning to like IgniteTable as well. How would something like this be introduced to Ignite? Would we have IgniteTable extend IgniteCache? What would happen to cache groups? D. On Thu, Oct 18, 2018 at 7:58 AM Павлухин Иван wrote: > HI all, > > +1 for "table" from me. For me "table" has se

Re: Applicability of term 'cache' to Apache Ignite

On Thu, Oct 18, 2018 at 5:18 AM David Harvey wrote: > We had a terminology agreement early on where we agreed to call them > caches, but we still call them tables anyway. > > When I finally understood how you could have multiple tables in a single > cache, I tried to find example use cases, but

Re: Applicability of term 'cache' to Apache Ignite

HI all, +1 for "table" from me. For me "table" has several benefits: 1. It's common and consequently easy to explain and understand. 2. It's quite universal. One can worry that "table" does not describes key-value storage well. I don't see any problem here, because Hash Table data structure co

Re: Applicability of term 'cache' to Apache Ignite

We had a terminology agreement early on where we agreed to call them caches, but we still call them tables anyway. When I finally understood how you could have multiple tables in a single cache, I tried to find example use cases, but couldn't. Is there even a test with multiple queryEntities? O

Re: Applicability of term 'cache' to Apache Ignite

>From my perspective (ML module), it will be very easy to talk about Ignite in SQL terms like table (with additional information about ability to make key-value CRUD operations, not only SELECT * FROM Table) Also we could look on PostgreSQL with different plugins for SQL extension like PostGIS or s

Re: Applicability of term 'cache' to Apache Ignite

I thought that current "caches" and "tables" have 1-to-N relation. If that's not a problem, than I also think that "table" is the best term. On Thu, Oct 18, 2018 at 9:29 AM Vladimir Ozerov wrote: > Well, I never thought about term “table” as a replacement for “cache”, but > it appears to be good

Re: Applicability of term 'cache' to Apache Ignite

Well, I never thought about term “table” as a replacement for “cache”, but it appears to be good candidate. This is used by many some major vendors whose underlying storage is indeed a kind of key-value data structure. Most well-known example is MySQL with its MyISAM engine. Table can be used for

Re: Applicability of term 'cache' to Apache Ignite

Or we could extend our SQL commands by "GET BY KEY = X" and "PUT (x1, x2, x3) BY KEY = X" and the IgniteTable could be correct. Agree with Denis that each table in the 3rd normal form is like key-value store. Key-value operations are only subset of rich SQL commands. The problem with IgniteData th

Re: Applicability of term 'cache' to Apache Ignite

Key-value calls are just primary key based calls. From a user perspective, it's the same as "SELECT * FROM table WHERE primary_idx = X", just different API. -- Denis On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 5:04 PM Dmitriy Setrakyan wrote: > On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 4:58 PM Denis Magda wrote: > > > I've been ca

Re: Applicability of term 'cache' to Apache Ignite

On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 4:58 PM Denis Magda wrote: > I've been calling everything "tables" instead of "caches" for a while. The > main reason is the maturity of our SQL engine - seeing more SQL users and > deployments which talk "tables" language. > > I think "IgniteTable" only implies SQL, not k

Re: Applicability of term 'cache' to Apache Ignite

I've been calling everything "tables" instead of "caches" for a while. The main reason is the maturity of our SQL engine - seeing more SQL users and deployments which talk "tables" language. On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 3:55 PM Dmitriy Setrakyan wrote: > If dataset cannot be used, can we still consi

Re: Applicability of term 'cache' to Apache Ignite

If dataset cannot be used, can we still consider "IgniteData"? D. On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 5:06 AM Ilya Lantukh wrote: > As I see, many people agree that the term *"cache"* is outdated, but > consider these changes too disruptive. > > For me, keeping terminology up-to-date is important part of p

Re: Applicability of term 'cache' to Apache Ignite

As I see, many people agree that the term *"cache"* is outdated, but consider these changes too disruptive. For me, keeping terminology up-to-date is important part of project development. If we change some of our core terms with more relevant ones, it indeed might cause confusion for current user

Re: Applicability of term 'cache' to Apache Ignite

Unfortunately, we already use the word *"store"* for many other concepts, like CacheStore and PageStore. I'd prefer to avoid giving it one more meaning. As already mentioned, *"dataset"* has special meaning for ML folks. *"Bucket" *might give wrong association with bucket in a hash table. On Wed

Re: Applicability of term 'cache' to Apache Ignite

Well, the obvious term for me is a "Store" or "MemoryStore", as we already have persistence store. Best Regards, Igor On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 1:19 PM Andrey Kuznetsov wrote: > I'm not an ML expert, so 'dataset' term just reminds me of various client > drivers to access tables from RDBM servers

Re: Applicability of term 'cache' to Apache Ignite

I'm not an ML expert, so 'dataset' term just reminds me of various client drivers to access tables from RDBM servers. For me, the only common trait of all kinds of Ignite caches is their asociativity. So if we rename them I'd suggest something like KVStore. ср, 17 окт. 2018 г. в 12:56, Alexey Zino

Re: Applicability of term 'cache' to Apache Ignite

>From my perspective, the main goal is to make easy the explanation what is Ignite on conferences, marketing deals, in papers, in documentation. And the /cache/ term really reduces the area of Ignite usage in users minds. I don't support the critical changes in code base, but I support all changes

Re: Applicability of term 'cache' to Apache Ignite

I'm sorry, but the IgniteDataset can not be used like a basic term, due to it's ML specific term and also we have a few kind of datasets (that are not equivalents of IgniteCache/Space and etc) like IgniteDataset, PartitionBasedDataset, LocalCachedDataset and so on. Of course, we could find a datas

Re: Applicability of term 'cache' to Apache Ignite

“tablespace”. > > I have to say I never heard of JavaSpaces :) Don’t think many people will > recall that. > > Stan > > From: Dmitriy Setrakyan > Sent: 16 октября 2018 г. 20:21 > To: dev > Subject: Re: Applicability of term 'cache' to Apache Ignite > > Al

RE: Applicability of term 'cache' to Apache Ignite

Setrakyan Sent: 16 октября 2018 г. 20:21 To: dev Subject: Re: Applicability of term 'cache' to Apache Ignite Although I agree that this change is disruptive, can we just entertain Ilya's idea for a bit? What if we were designing Ignite from scratch, what different name would we give to

Re: Applicability of term 'cache' to Apache Ignite

> >> key-value pairs and implements JCache API > >> - IgniteSql (we’re doing it eventually, right?) is a wrapper around > >> IgniteSpace that allows to store SQL tables and implements ANSI SQL > >> - IgniteQueue is a wrapper that implements Queue > &g

Re: Applicability of term 'cache' to Apache Ignite

allows to store SQL tables and implements ANSI SQL - IgniteQueue is a wrapper that implements Queue and so on. WDYT? Stan From: Ilya Lantukh Sent: 15 октября 2018 г. 14:49 To: dev@ignite.apache.org Subject: Applicability of term 'cache' to Apache Ignite Hi Igniters, I would like to ris

Re: Applicability of term 'cache' to Apache Ignite

hat allows to store > > key-value pairs and implements JCache API > > - IgniteSql (we’re doing it eventually, right?) is a wrapper around > > IgniteSpace that allows to store SQL tables and implements ANSI SQL > > - IgniteQueue is a wrapper that implements Queue > > and

Re: Applicability of term 'cache' to Apache Ignite

ql (we’re doing it eventually, right?) is a wrapper around > IgniteSpace that allows to store SQL tables and implements ANSI SQL > - IgniteQueue is a wrapper that implements Queue > and so on. > > WDYT? > > Stan > > From: Ilya Lantukh > Sent: 15 октября 2018 г. 14:49 &g

RE: Applicability of term 'cache' to Apache Ignite

- IgniteQueue is a wrapper that implements Queue and so on. WDYT? Stan From: Ilya Lantukh Sent: 15 октября 2018 г. 14:49 To: dev@ignite.apache.org Subject: Applicability of term 'cache' to Apache Ignite Hi Igniters, I would like to rise a question how we use the term *'cache'*

Applicability of term 'cache' to Apache Ignite

Hi Igniters, I would like to rise a question how we use the term *'cache'* in Ignite and how it corresponds to terminology in IT industry in general. >From wikipedia: In computing , a *cache* /kæʃ/ *kash*