You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to user@ignite.apache.org by vkulichenko <va...@gmail.com> on 2017/06/07 00:58:22 UTC

Re: Concurrent job execution and FifoQueueCollisionSpi.parallelJobsNumber=1

Hi Ryan,

I will take a look this week.

-Val



--
View this message in context: http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/Concurrent-job-execution-and-FifoQueueCollisionSpi-parallelJobsNumber-1-tp8697p13440.html
Sent from the Apache Ignite Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Re: Concurrent job execution and FifoQueueCollisionSpi.parallelJobsNumber=1

Posted by vkulichenko <va...@gmail.com>.
Hi Ryan,

Yes, I think. But note that will create a high contention on this method -
each job request will acquire the same lock. Although, it's probably not an
issue in your case as you do not allow to execute more than one job at a
time anyway.

-Val



--
View this message in context: http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/Concurrent-job-execution-and-FifoQueueCollisionSpi-parallelJobsNumber-1-tp8697p14282.html
Sent from the Apache Ignite Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Re: Concurrent job execution and FifoQueueCollisionSpi.parallelJobsNumber=1

Posted by Ryan Ripken <ry...@rmanet.com>.
I use IgniteMessaging to update status info from inside my compute jobs 
so publicThreadPoolSize=1 probably isn't going to work.

In your opinion, would a new CollisionSpi implementation that 
synchronized the onCollision method resolve the issue?



On 6/9/2017 5:01 PM, vkulichenko wrote:
> Ryan,
>
> Yes, this is about IgniteMessaging API.
>
> -Val
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context: http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/Concurrent-job-execution-and-FifoQueueCollisionSpi-parallelJobsNumber-1-tp8697p13586.html
> Sent from the Apache Ignite Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Re: Concurrent job execution and FifoQueueCollisionSpi.parallelJobsNumber=1

Posted by vkulichenko <va...@gmail.com>.
Ryan,

Yes, this is about IgniteMessaging API.

-Val



--
View this message in context: http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/Concurrent-job-execution-and-FifoQueueCollisionSpi-parallelJobsNumber-1-tp8697p13586.html
Sent from the Apache Ignite Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Re: Concurrent job execution and FifoQueueCollisionSpi.parallelJobsNumber=1

Posted by ryan <ry...@rmanet.com>.
Interesting.  I'll have to give that a try.  The documentation for 
PublicThreadPoolSize explains that the executor service will be in 
charge of processing GridJobs and user messages set to the node.

What are examples of user messages?  Would that include usages of 
IgniteMessaging such as the following?

             IgnitePredicate<ClusterNode> nodeForNodeId = 
GridFunc.nodeForNodeId(taskNodeId);
             IgniteMessaging rmtMsg = 
grid.message(grid.cluster().forPredicate(nodeForNodeId));
             rmtMsg.send(FrmComputeTask.LOGGING_TOPIC, msg2);



On 6/9/2017 2:22 PM, vkulichenko wrote:
> Ryan,
>
> I added a comment in the ticket. I would recommend you to set the size of
> public thread pool to 1 (IgniteConfiguration#publicThreadPoolSize) to make
> sure that jobs are not executed in parallel.
>
> -Val
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context: http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/Concurrent-job-execution-and-FifoQueueCollisionSpi-parallelJobsNumber-1-tp8697p13581.html
> Sent from the Apache Ignite Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Re: Concurrent job execution and FifoQueueCollisionSpi.parallelJobsNumber=1

Posted by vkulichenko <va...@gmail.com>.
Ryan,

I added a comment in the ticket. I would recommend you to set the size of
public thread pool to 1 (IgniteConfiguration#publicThreadPoolSize) to make
sure that jobs are not executed in parallel.

-Val



--
View this message in context: http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/Concurrent-job-execution-and-FifoQueueCollisionSpi-parallelJobsNumber-1-tp8697p13581.html
Sent from the Apache Ignite Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.