Ah, Yes that's right, it's ok now. <br><br><div class="gmail_quote">W dniu 15 lipca 2009 17:22 użytkownik Emmanuel Bernard <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:emmanuel@hibernate.org">emmanuel@hibernate.org</a>></span> napisał:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;"><div style="word-wrap:break-word">I am not sure I understand.<div>I assume that caches somehow have a unique identifier to recognize themselves in a cluster right?</div>
<div>So you have a CacheManager created on each node and by this "unique identifier", you can add a cache node to a given grid.</div><div><br></div><div>Infinitians, more infos?<div><div></div><div class="h5"><br>
<div><br><div><div>On Jul 15, 2009, at 11:05, Łukasz Moreń wrote:</div><br><blockquote type="cite"><div>To have access to this same <span style="background-repeat:initial;background-color:yellow">Infinispan</span> cache on all nodes (master and slaves) I have to create it from this same, single <span style="background-repeat:initial;background-color:yellow">CacheManager</span>.</div>
<div>So there is difficulty how to distribute <span style="background-repeat:initial;background-color:yellow">CacheManager</span> to all nodes - something like singleton in a cluster.</div> <div>Is there some recommended option how to achieve that in our case?</div>
<div><br></div><div>Lukasz</div><br><div class="gmail_quote">2009/7/14 Emmanuel Bernard <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:emmanuel@hibernate.org" target="_blank">emmanuel@hibernate.org</a>></span><br> <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div style="word-wrap:break-word"><br><div><div><div>On Jul 13, 2009, at 23:59, Manik Surtani wrote:</div> <br><blockquote type="cite"><div style="word-wrap:break-word"><br><div><div>On 13 Jul 2009, at 17:10, Łukasz Moreń wrote:</div>
<br><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin-top:0px;margin-right:0px;margin-bottom:0px;margin-left:0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204, 204, 204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">
1. share the same grid cache between the master and the slaves</blockquote><div><br></div><span style="font-family:arial, sans-serif;font-size:13px;border-collapse:collapse"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin-top:0px;margin-right:0px;margin-bottom:0px;margin-left:0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204, 204, 204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">
Infinispan has a flat structure. The key has to contain:</blockquote><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin-top:0px;margin-right:0px;margin-bottom:0px;margin-left:0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204, 204, 204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">
- the index name</blockquote><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin-top:0px;margin-right:0px;margin-bottom:0px;margin-left:0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204, 204, 204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">
- the chunk name </blockquote><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin-top:0px;margin-right:0px;margin-bottom:0px;margin-left:0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204, 204, 204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">
<span style="border-collapse:separate;font-family:arial;font-size:small">Both with essentially be the unique identifier. </span></blockquote><div><br></div><div>I suppose in this idea all indexes are stored in a one single grid. What about one Infinispan grid per directory, similarly to RAMDirectory or FSDirectory? IMHO it could make some simplifications i.e. in metadata or key names. </div>
<div>Are there any Infinispan drawbacks to have a high number of caches in the network? Sharing JGroups channels can help in that?</div></span></blockquote><div><br></div><div>They already share JGroups channels and other "heavy" components wherever possible. Its just that configuration becomes more of a pain, etc. </div>
<div><br></div><div>When you say one cache per index, how do you define an index? Does 1 index mean all indexed data for a single java type? In which case couldn't these scale up dynamically and potentially on-demand? No wait - these are fixed in Hibernate Search on startup, correct?</div>
</div></div></blockquote><div><br></div></div><div>Right for now they are fixed at startup time.</div><div>I'm unclear what is easier really. One cache or multiple caches. Multiple configurations (if seen by the user) is a PITA on the other hand could provide some flexibility (ie one cache behavior != than another) but that's rarely needed very likely.</div>
<div><br></div></div></div></blockquote></div><br></blockquote></div><br></div></div></div></div></div></blockquote></div><br>