[
https://issues.redhat.com/browse/TEIIDSB-170?page=com.atlassian.jira.plug...
]
Ramesh Reddy commented on TEIIDSB-170:
--------------------------------------
It's better to require slightly more user input, than to
introduce a brittle solution.
I think it is bad to ask user for more input based because of the your processing model,
let's say if we are going to materialize to database, do we need this? no. Then why it
should be different for this data grid case.
there are instances where it's better to have an in-process and
in-memory cache, which we can't express here correct?
Yes, you can express it, see that table I provided above. The create flag can be tuned
off, but it is not by default.
If you want foolproof, then we'd make an out of process call to
the existing parser.
Unless we want to start writing an Operator in Java I do not how to do that. You are
asking spin an external process out to java and execute and capture the results in GO
operator.
The other we could do, we start all the caches with "resource name" as prefix or
post fix, then delete all of them that matches to that. It can not any simpler than that.
Automate materialization to JDG
-------------------------------
Key: TEIIDSB-170
URL:
https://issues.redhat.com/browse/TEIIDSB-170
Project: Teiid Spring Boot
Issue Type: Enhancement
Components: OpenShift
Reporter: Steven Hawkins
Assignee: Ramesh Reddy
Priority: Major
Fix For: 1.5.0
Original Estimate: 1 week
Time Spent: 1 week, 3 days, 2 hours
Remaining Estimate: 0 minutes
Create an internal materialization replacement needs that is turnkey materialization to
JDG (little to no user setup required)
- the operator may create the infinispan cluster if needed
- the status table and internal representation of the materialization target would be
setup automatically
For the user this would be as simple marking a view as materialized and then it would be
populated in jdg upon deployment. They would not have any concerns with cache naming,
status tables, etc.
For simplicity the initial version would make a similar assumption to the current
internal logic - it is for only a specific vdb. If the vdb cr is modified, then it's
expected that the cache would be recreated.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v7.13.8#713008)