ignite-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Valentin Kulichenko <valentin.kuliche...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Timeline for support of compute functions by thin clients
Date Thu, 22 Mar 2018 23:27:36 GMT
I agree that compute and services functionality is important for thin
client. It doesn't seem to be very hard to implement, but would provide
much better flexibility, as users would be able to do remote invocation of
arbitrary code, use collocated processing, etc. Having an ability to do
this from a thin client without joining the topology is a huge advantage.

-Val

On Fri, Mar 16, 2018 at 4:00 AM, Vladimir Ozerov <vozerov@gridgain.com>
wrote:

> Denis,
>
> From client perspective any compute task is also request - response. This
> doesn't distinguish compute from any other API anyhow. There are no problem
> to add closures, tasks, services, etc.. What is really difficult is
> components requiring non-trivial thread interaction and complex request
> workflows. E.g. streaming, COPY command, continuous queries, events.
>
> On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 10:25 PM, Denis Magda <dmagda@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > Pavel,
> >
> > I just don't see a substantial reason why we need to support the
> > compute APIs.
> >
> > As you properly mentioned, it's not easy to copy all the APIs and, again,
> > for what. It's right that the thin client allows decoupling .NET from
> JVM,
> > but its implementation won't be more performant than the regular client's
> > one.
> >
> > So, personally, a thin client (.NET, Node.JS, Java, Python, etc.) is a
> > lightweight connection to the cluster that supports classic client-server
> > request-response operations. If someone needs more (compute, services,
> > streaming, ML), then go for the regular client which is battle-tested and
> > available for usage.
> >
> > --
> > Denis
> >
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Mar 14, 2018 at 1:33 PM, Pavel Tupitsyn <ptupitsyn@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Denis,
> > >
> > > > There are no any plans for that level of support
> > > Why do you think so?
> > > We already have ScanQuery with filter in .NET Thin Client, which
> involves
> > > remote code execution on server nodes.
> > > It is quite similar to Compute.Broadcast and such.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Pavel
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wed, Mar 14, 2018 at 11:32 PM, Denis Magda <dmagda@apache.org>
> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Raymond,
> > > >
> > > > Then I would suggest you keep using the regular .NET client that
> > supports
> > > > and optimized for computations. Is there any reason why you can't use
> > the
> > > > regular one?
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Denis
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Mar 14, 2018 at 12:53 PM, Raymond Wilson <
> > > > raymond_wilson@trimble.com
> > > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Hi Denis,
> > > > >
> > > > > We are using Ignite.Net and are planning to use 2.4 + .Net Core +
> > thin
> > > > > client support to enable lightweight containerisable services that
> > > > interact
> > > > > with the main Ignite compute grid.
> > > > >
> > > > > These work flows are less about Get/Put style semantics, and more
> > about
> > > > > using grid compute.
> > > > >
> > > > > Eg: Here's an example where a client context asks a remote context
> to
> > > > > render
> > > > > a bitmap tile in an ICompute:
> > > > >
> > > > >         public Bitmap Execute(TileRenderRequestArgument arg)
> > > > >         {
> > > > >             IComputeFunc<TileRenderRequestArgument, Bitmap>
func =
> > new
> > > > > TileRenderRequestComputeFunc();
> > > > >
> > > > >             return
> > > > > _ignite.GetCluster().ForRemotes().GetCompute().Apply(func, arg);
> > > > >         }
> > > > >
> > > > > In this example, the calling context here could be a lightweight
> > > Kestrel
> > > > > web
> > > > > service end point delegating rendering to a remote service.
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > Raymond.
> > > > >
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: Denis Magda [mailto:dmagda@apache.org]
> > > > > Sent: Thursday, March 15, 2018 8:31 AM
> > > > > To: dev@ignite.apache.org
> > > > > Subject: Re: Timeline for support of compute functions by thin
> > clients
> > > > >
> > > > > Hi Raymond,
> > > > >
> > > > > There are no any plans for that level of support. The thin clients
> > are
> > > > > targeted for classic client-server processing use cases when a
> client
> > > > > request data from a server, does something with it locally and
> > > > potentially
> > > > > writes changes back to the server. ICache, SQL fall under this
> > > category.
> > > > >
> > > > > Are you intended to use .NET thin client or anyone else?
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Denis
> > > > >
> > > > > On Wed, Mar 14, 2018 at 12:25 PM, Raymond Wilson <
> > > > > raymond_wilson@trimble.com
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The thin client implementation in Ignite 2.4 only covers a subset
> > of
> > > > > > the ICache interface.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > When will we see thin client support for compute, messaging
etc?
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Raymond.
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message