Re 1. num_copies remote calls for what? I suppose you're talking about a get()? The problem of reducing that call to just 1 call is that if the node does not respond quickly, you'll have to wait until the call times out before you hit another node. By sending multiple calls we take advantage of the fact that there're multiple copies of the data. So, by making 1 call you could end up making your system work slower, so not sure your suggestion is a good idea. Feel free to open a jira in https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN
Re 2. When a node invalidates the L1 cache of another node, it does it within the context of the modification, so a get(), regardless of whether L1 is on or not, will of course the latest committed value. Remember that get() operations do not require to acquired locks, so hence there's no timeout for them. Also, there's no such thing as L1 cache timeout, there's only lock timeout and locks are only acquired for write ops.
Yes . I was talking about a get.
I was just trying to think to reduce the network traffic.
I understand your point in making num_copies calls. I was thinking if there was an option (an extra attribute) which could give the user to control this functionality it would be great. But i get your point.
As I said, if you feel this is important for you, submit a JIRA and you could even have a go at implementing it? That way you could see whether if it'd actually reduce the network traffic with your own eyes
I have raised a ticket for the same. https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-916.
This is nothing which is blocking me . When i was reading the documentation just thought of it as a configuration worth having.
When i start stressing the current software which uses infinispan I will give a try tweaking the settings and the effect it has on teh network :-)