[infinispan-dev] Proposal: ISPN-1394 Manual rehashing in 5.2

[Manik Surtani]

On 1 Feb 2012, at 14:39, Dan Berindei wrote:

>>> 
>>> The getCache() timeout should not be increased at all. Instead I would
>>> propose that getCache() returns a functional cache immediately, even
>>> if the cache didn't receive any data, and it works solely as an L1
>>> cache until the administrator allows it to join. I'd even make it
>>> possible to designate a cache as an L1-only cache, so it's never an
>>> owner for any key.
>> 
>> I agree that would be very nice, but makes it much more complex to
>> implement in 5.2 as well: functional L1 means that the other nodes
>> must accept this node as part of the grid, including for L1
>> invalidation purposes.
> 
> I don't think L1 would be a problem, the L1 code doesn't assume that
> the requestor is in the CH. That would basically be the only
> difference between a "normal" node and a "L1-only" node.

No, but the Address does need to be in the View.  But I suppose this depends on your decoupling of the 2PC view installation from state transfer and consistent hash installation.  :)

--
Manik Surtani
manik at jboss.org
twitter.com/maniksurtani

Lead, Infinispan
http://www.infinispan.org



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/infinispan-dev/attachments/20120204/38026eb8/attachment.html