From dev-return-22315-apmail-ignite-dev-archive=ignite.apache.org@ignite.apache.org Thu Jun 1 14:27:27 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-ignite-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-ignite-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 2B1E21932A for ; Thu, 1 Jun 2017 14:27:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 77032 invoked by uid 500); 1 Jun 2017 14:27:19 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-ignite-dev-archive@ignite.apache.org Received: (qmail 76994 invoked by uid 500); 1 Jun 2017 14:27:19 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@ignite.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@ignite.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@ignite.apache.org Received: (qmail 76692 invoked by uid 99); 1 Jun 2017 14:27:19 -0000 Received: from pnap-us-west-generic-nat.apache.org (HELO spamd4-us-west.apache.org) (209.188.14.142) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 01 Jun 2017 14:27:19 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by spamd4-us-west.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at spamd4-us-west.apache.org) with ESMTP id D217CC1471 for ; Thu, 1 Jun 2017 14:27:18 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at spamd4-us-west.apache.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.296 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.296 tagged_above=-999 required=6.31 tests=[DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=2, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-2.796, RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM=0.5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=disabled Authentication-Results: spamd4-us-west.apache.org (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gridgain-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com Received: from mx1-lw-us.apache.org ([10.40.0.8]) by localhost (spamd4-us-west.apache.org [10.40.0.11]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id afWAqsLBaGIn for ; Thu, 1 Jun 2017 14:27:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-ua0-f171.google.com (mail-ua0-f171.google.com [209.85.217.171]) by mx1-lw-us.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at mx1-lw-us.apache.org) with ESMTPS id 311C45F3F5 for ; Thu, 1 Jun 2017 14:27:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-ua0-f171.google.com with SMTP id u10so28471009uaf.1 for ; Thu, 01 Jun 2017 07:27:17 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gridgain-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=AVRRRBO3Pu3Imp6gCo/opvPZedV8y8+ffCv9G2OL6tM=; b=IlTefT5Wxfn3lJwLx0Lr60pggKlMAltIBWu3EghyoHeg7HNRQu8TJ4iWa9EjsDbaIg sD+VFyqWvNIfienG+XlH/3yVHq1CnMMWCUJ8hLUG26rauxvzFG7Kb0Re8nVF9iO8+tnG T3gXNaev+0utf41vlz2xbpofIKkvn2N9SWDyS98VVta0U8EKGg/ZJmR8nxhDhSOpqzPn 5S3q+1zx1bFZnQc/wktohPwiU9TnRf67pJdj9H80RWbMdwJX57rjQBfonAW89w5VejC1 WNomoTE2mikIaDPFDyYdD3aHM/NwA15JP5z+19i98kmkwUuQpN+arJOL+TI3DAfxS9+J 8fvg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=AVRRRBO3Pu3Imp6gCo/opvPZedV8y8+ffCv9G2OL6tM=; b=IbUnjCKZ8FMAPfJk3/m+i2L8qdj8h6GaBzEpfnfw9JWEjDrDIcXp73kXMocjLPKHPQ sZ/5mpfZ4zZE2VK5evkqGkcRbf/7cXAbY5zgvpUK5t609vZiwgN12Rzi/lyhlBRlsOzR eNMHEbi22doC7HU3ua/BeFQ2PIxopwUZfNBe+7a3ECV3yhNO6Qd/jsLu4vOCrPBY/8Wv TjTBsOKpVBHjZ8zqJ12mBry8p9EeK0loj2rJv/LDAT5k64cS/OibEH1/jlyHn/WQrdfc f2hL0tN3phnwLyYTfwKsW7fp0eDgNboUDIm5MbdfJmBOd1YzVzLl651bA0NNgPexiVQr W/yg== X-Gm-Message-State: AODbwcBRWKBiU+9rTK64hLLF0l5PGhirQwQ+76w2VjXmZy3sxp4VpbCi 0xB3UUMGiEAi6HYvzntbVt9TJ8lIq6iF X-Received: by 10.176.16.20 with SMTP id f20mr919554uab.146.1496327231075; Thu, 01 Jun 2017 07:27:11 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.103.109.129 with HTTP; Thu, 1 Jun 2017 07:27:10 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: From: Ilya Lantukh Date: Thu, 1 Jun 2017 17:27:10 +0300 Message-ID: Subject: Re: contention on DataStructure creation/removing To: dev@ignite.apache.org Cc: Alexey Goncharuk , Yakov Zhdanov Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="f403045e1f2413b4a80550e6d561" --f403045e1f2413b4a80550e6d561 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Alexey, I think, that from user's perspective data structures look more like a library that works on top of caches, not something completely separate and independent. Most properties from CacheConfiguration make sense for Atomics and Collections (for example, properties related to rebalancing). We can always validate cache config in methods that create data structure and throw exception if it is incorrect. But simply adding groupName to AtomicConfiguration is fine too. On Thu, Jun 1, 2017 at 5:16 PM, Yakov Zhdanov wrote: > Agree with Alex. > > --Yakov > > 2017-06-01 17:10 GMT+03:00 Alexey Goncharuk : > >> I do not like this change - we intentionally separated a few properties >> in AtomicConfiguration that make sense for Atomics, there is not need to >> get back to cache configuration again. In my understanding, we only need to >> add groupName to Atomics and Collection configuration. >> >> Thoughts? >> >> 2017-06-01 16:32 GMT+03:00 Ilya Lantukh : >> >>> This is how I see API to create data structures in user-defined caches: >>> https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/2058 >>> >>> On Thu, Jun 1, 2017 at 2:56 PM, Ilya Lantukh >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi all, >>>> >>>> There are other problems with current data structures implementation, >>>> which are related to new persistence mechanics. For example, take a look at >>>> this ticket: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-5324 >>>> I think the best approach is to store data structures not in special >>>> system cache, but in user defined ones. All API methods to access data >>>> structures will have cacheName parameter, and unique identifier will be a >>>> pair (cacheName, dsName). In this case we won't need a single place to >>>> store all data structure metadata. >>>> What do you think? >>>> >>>> >>>> On Thu, Jun 1, 2017 at 1:32 PM, Mikhail Cherkasov < >>>> mcherkasov@gridgain.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> On Thu, Jun 1, 2017 at 1:29 AM, Dmitriy Setrakyan < >>>>> dsetrakyan@apache.org> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> > Won't it be confusing from a user stand point to have multiple data >>>>> > structures with the same name? >>>>> > >>>>> >>>>> I won't change this, optionally I can allow to have the same name for >>>>> different data structures' types, >>>>> but it's better to keep single namespace for all data structures as >>>>> it's >>>>> implemented now. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> > Also, what is the performance impact of this >>>>> > change? >>>>> > >>>>> >>>>> I'm working on a benchmark. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Thanks, >>>>> Mikhail. >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Best regards, >>>> Ilya >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Best regards, >>> Ilya >>> >> >> > -- Best regards, Ilya --f403045e1f2413b4a80550e6d561--