No it doesn't. That's quite a different problem. I don't want manual
intervention.
On 23 January 2015 at 08:35, Adrian Nistor <anistor(a)redhat.com> wrote:
Galder, Manik, the jira you mention is ISPN-3140 JMX operation to
suppress state transfer [1], implemented quite a long time ago. This
should solve the problem of many simultaneous joiners. Does this fit
your needs?
[1]
https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-3140
On 01/23/2015 06:10 PM, Galder Zamarreño wrote:
> Hey Manik, I think I remember some JIRA to have a state transfer
manually, upon management operation or similar, in order to avoid state
transfer mayhem when bringing a lot of nodes at the same time. I don’t know
what’s happened to that, but would it work?
>
> Cheers,
>
> On 17 Jan 2015, at 02:43, Manik Surtani <manik(a)infinispan.org> wrote:
>
>> Greetings. :-)
>>
>> I chatted with a few of you offline about this earlier; anyone has any
thoughts around a ClusterLoader implementation that, instead of
broadcasting to the entire cluster, unicasts to the owners of a given key
by inspecting the DistributionManager. Thinking of using this as a
lazy/on-demand form of state transfer in a distributed cluster, so joiners
don’t trigger big chunks of data moving around eagerly.
>>
>> • M
>> _______________________________________________
>> infinispan-dev mailing list
>> infinispan-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev
>
> --
> Galder Zamarreño
> galder(a)redhat.com
>
twitter.com/galderz
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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