...such as bringing up a backup data center.
-----Original Message-----
From: infinispan-dev-bounces(a)lists.jboss.org
[mailto:infinispan-dev-bounces@lists.jboss.org] On Behalf Of Bela Ban
Sent: Tuesday, January 31, 2012 11:18 AM
To: infinispan-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
Subject: Re: [infinispan-dev] Proposal: ISPN-1394 Manual rehashing in 5.2
I cannot volunteer either, but I find it important to be done in 5.2 !
Unless rehashing works flawlessly with a large number of nodes joining
at the same time, I think manual rehashing is crucial...
On 1/31/12 5:13 PM, Sanne Grinovero wrote:
On 31 January 2012 16:06, Bela Ban<bban(a)redhat.com> wrote:
> This is essentially what I suggested at the Lisbon meeting, right ?
Yes!
> I think Dan had a design wiki on this somewhere...
Just rising it here as it was moved to 6.0, while I think it deserves
a dedicated thread to better think about it. If it's not hard, I think
it should be done sooner.
But while I started the thread to wake up the brilliant minds, I can't
volunteer for this to make it happen.
Sanne
>
>
> On 1/31/12 4:53 PM, Sanne Grinovero wrote:
>> I think this is an important feature to have soon;
>>
>> My understanding of it:
>>
>> We default with the feature off, and newly discovered nodes are
>> added/removed as usual. With a JMX operatable switch, one can disable
>> this:
>>
>> If a remote node is joining the JGroups view, but rehash is off: it
>> will be added to a to-be-installed view, but this won't be installed
>> until rehash is enabled again. This gives time to add more changes
>> before starting the rehash, and would help a lot to start larger
>> clusters.
>>
>> If the [self] node is booting and joining a cluster with manual rehash
>> off, the start process and any getCache() invocation should block and
>> wait for it to be enabled. This would need of course to override the
>> usually low timeouts.
>>
>> When a node is suspected it's a bit a different story as we need to
>> make sure no data is lost. The principle is the same, but maybe we
>> should have two flags: one which is a "soft request" to avoid rehashes
>> of less than N members (and refuse N>=numOwners ?), one which is just
>> disable it and don't care: data might be in a cachestore, data might
>> not be important. Which reminds me, we should consider as well a JMX
>> command to flush the container to the CacheLoader.
>>
>> --Sanne
>> _______________________________________________
>> infinispan-dev mailing list
>> infinispan-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev
>
> --
> Bela Ban
> Lead JGroups (
http://www.jgroups.org)
> JBoss / Red Hat
> _______________________________________________
> infinispan-dev mailing list
> infinispan-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev
_______________________________________________
infinispan-dev mailing list
infinispan-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev
--
Bela Ban
Lead JGroups (
http://www.jgroups.org)
JBoss / Red Hat
_______________________________________________
infinispan-dev mailing list
infinispan-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev