Without subscription-redundancy you are running the risk that some of the data isn't being pushed to you in the event of a server failure.
-- Mike Stolz Principal Engineer, GemFire Product Manager Mobile: +1-631-835-4771 On Sun, Jul 23, 2017 at 10:06 PM, Akihiro Kitada <akit...@pivotal.io> wrote: > Hello Roi, > > I want to confirm actual your configuration. > > >- I have a replicated Node, say N1 and its replicated N2 (N2 gets > activated when N1 is down) and they are configured to send updates via > continuous query to my process which then reports on these updates. > > Do node N1 and N2 replicate each data based on the same Replicated region > configuration in the same distributed system? If not, how do N1 and N2 > replicated data? Could you attach actual cache configuration (such as > cache.xml) for N1 and N2? > > Who update the data, some specific Geode client application or Geode peer > (cache server internally)? > > Thanks. > > > > > -- > Akihiro Kitada | Staff Customer Engineer | +81 80 3716 3736 > Support.Pivotal.io <http://support.pivotal.io/> | Mon-Fri 9:00am to > 5:30pm JST | 1-877-477-2269 > [image: support] <https://support.pivotal.io/> [image: twitter] > <https://twitter.com/pivotal> [image: linkedin] > <https://www.linkedin.com/company/3048967> [image: facebook] > <https://www.facebook.com/pivotalsoftware> [image: google plus] > <https://plus.google.com/+Pivotal> [image: youtube] > <https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLAdzTan_eSPScpj2J50ErtzR9ANSzv3kl> > > > 2017-07-23 22:04 GMT+09:00 Roi Apelker <roi.apel...@amdocs.com>: > > > Hi, (Bear with me I am a bit new here :)) > > > > I have the following scenario, I wonder if anyone can comment on it - is > > it a known issue, maybe it was solved already in later version, etc. (I > am > > using version 1.0.0) > > Or maybe you can point me to somewhere in the code. > > I have posted this question once before (thanks Dan S. for relating to > > it), however I was away for 3 weeks therefore posting again. > > > > - I have a replicated Node, say N1 and its replicated N2 (N2 gets > > activated when N1 is down) and they are configured to send updates via > > continuous query to my process which then reports on these updates. > > > > - N1 is working all the time and serves as a server, and data is written > > to it continuously from external clients. If 1000 events are written to > N1, > > the final report I am referring to will indicate 1000. > > > > - When N1 gets killed for any reason, the client connects to N2 which > > continues to send the continuous query results. > > > > - But sometimes, the report is inaccurate, e.g. after running 1000 > events, > > my report says 950, as if some events of the continuous query do not > reach > > the client (the actual data does arrive its destination, just the report > is > > qrong) > > > > The fact is, that the report is not accurate, and I only assume that > > something is wrong in the update mechanism, somewhere in the area of > > continuous query, or somewhere in the replication between the nodes. > > > > Right now, the parameter of subscription-redundancy is not configured. > But > > subscription-enabled="true" . > > > > What is the significance of not configuring the subscription-redundancy ? > > does it mean that client disconnection may cause continuous query events > to > > be discarded? > > And if so, is it "may be discarded" or "will be discarded", meaning, will > > the result be always the same or not? > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > Roi > > This message and the information contained herein is proprietary and > > confidential and subject to the Amdocs policy statement, > > > > you may review at https://www.amdocs.com/about/email-disclaimer < > > https://www.amdocs.com/about/email-disclaimer> > > > > >
