Yes, true. We're using SKIP_CACHE_STORE when writing to sessions. We never tested with CacheStores enabled. The only store, which we're tested with, is the "remote-store" which we're using for the cross-datacenter setup. We have lots of places when we're not just writing data to the "cache" directly and let the "remote-store" to propagate it, but instead we obtain "remoteCache" instance from the underlying remote-store and CRUD data directly to remoteCache to have some optimizations and guaranteed consistency and atomicity for remoteCache operations (EG. putIfAbsent, replace etc). That's also the reason why we're using SKIP_CACHE_STORE flag. Feel free to create JIRA for better support of other CacheStores. The other possibility to workaround this (besides what Sebastian already mentioned) is to have JDG server and configure your cache with the remote-store as described in our "Cross-Datacenter setup" documentation. On JDG side, you can configure the JDBC store to your cache. In other words, the session will be always written to JDG and JDG will write it to the undrlying JDBC. I know this option is far from ideal (you need to add JDG server just to workaround things), just mentioning it for completeness. Marek On 09/11/18 14:29, Sebastian Laskawiec wrote: Yes, I think that could be case, I see a plenty of places where we use SKIP_CACHE_STORE. Let me ask Marek for help here since it has been implemented long before I joined the team and I don't know the history behind it... On Thu, Nov 8, 2018 at 8:48 PM William Burns <wburns(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Sebastian Laskawiec" <slaskawi(a)redhat.com&gt; > > To: "Nicolas Ocquidant" <nocquidant(a)gmail.com&gt; > > Cc: keycloak-user(a)lists.jboss.org, "Will Burns Rosenquist Burns" < > wburns(a)redhat.com&gt; > > Sent: Thursday, November 8, 2018 12:33:47 PM > > Subject: Re: [keycloak-user] Shared datastore? > > > > So I think there are at least two ways to address this problem. This > first > > one is to use Offline Tokens [1]. I'm not sure if that fits into your > > application since it requires your client applications to store the > token. > > In other words you can simply delegate this problem one layer below in > your > > system. > > > > If that doesn't work for you, yes passivation is a way to go. Frankly, I > > haven't used passivation but from the manual I see it works hand in hand > > with eviction [2][3]. Will (on CC) can probably correct me here, but my > > understanding is that whenever an entry gets evicted, the passivation > > mechanism picks it up and stores somewhere. > > It does and it works, the problem is that passivation doesn't play well > with shared stores in Infinispan. We prevent this configuration in 9.4 or > newer even. > > I recommended that Nicolas just use eviction and a shared store without > passivation. However it seems that entries are not written to the store in > this configuration. My guess is that KeyCloak performs write operations > with the SKIP_CACHE_STORE flag and assumes entries will only be written to > the store due to passivation. Is there a reason for that? > > > > > [1] http://blog.keycloak.org/2015/12/offline-tokens-in-keycloak.html > > [2] > > > http://infinispan.org/docs/stable/user_guide/user_guide.html#cache_passiv... > > [3] > > > https://github.com/infinispan/infinispan/blob/master/core/src/test/java/o... > > > > On Thu, Nov 8, 2018 at 5:40 PM Nicolas Ocquidant <nocquidant(a)gmail.com&gt; > > wrote: > > > > > My requirements are the following: store tokens emitted by KC during > one > > > year. > > > > > > I don't know how many users there are, but here are the number I get: > > > * the number of connections a week is about 700k. > > > * the number of session refresh a week is about 200k. > > > > > > I approximated around 1M of sessions a week, thus 52M a year. > > > In memory, a user session has been estimated around 4KB (about 1KB in > > > file/DB). > > > > > > But I guess a refresh does not create another session isn't it? And > maybe > > > it's possible to ask KC to delete previous emitted tokens when a new > one is > > > created for a same user? > > > > > > If yes, my estimation is probably a little bit too high here, but I > > > certainly have several millions of tokens to keep (and maybe dozens of > > > millions). > > > > > > Thanks > > > --nick > > > > > > Le mer. 7 nov. 2018 à 18:17, Nicolas Ocquidant <nocquidant(a)gmail.com&gt; > a > > > écrit : > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > According to Infinispan, when passivation is disabled, every update > to > > > the > > > > cache should always write to the store. > > > > > > > > But I can't manage to get it work with Keycloak. If I disable > > > passivation, > > > > my SQL store (Postgres) stays empty, even if the cache is full. > > > > > > > > So, if passivation is needed for Keycloak to write to the DB, it > means > > > > that the use of a shared DB is not possible... > > > > > > > > But this leads to another issue for me. Enable passivation without a > > > > shared DB seems to imply that either 'fetch-state' or 'purge' > should be > > > > enabled on startup, in order for the cache to not contain stale > entries. > > > > > > > > 15:27:44,626 WARN > > > > > [org.infinispan.configuration.cache.AbstractStoreConfigurationBuilder] > > > (MSC > > > > service thread 1-6) ISPN000149: Fetch persistent state and purge on > > > startup > > > > are both disabled, cache may contain stale entries on startup > > > > > > > > As I need to keep millions of sessions, this will considerably slow > down > > > > the startup of my node (when started again after a crash for > instance). > > > > > > > > So, is shared datastore allowed in Keycloak? If yes, how to enable > it? > > > > Otherwise what other options do I have to improve my startup time, > if > > > > millions of sessions are in the store? > > > > > > > > Thanks > > > > --nick > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > keycloak-user mailing list > > > keycloak-user(a)lists.jboss.org > > > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/keycloak-user > > >