<div dir="ltr">By the way, there's some feedback on using 3.0.0 as a 2nd level cache on Hibernate here (see comments at the end):<br><br><a href="http://jbosscache.blogspot.com/2008/09/first-cr-for-300.html">http://jbosscache.blogspot.com/2008/09/first-cr-for-300.html</a><br>
<br>"I notice MVCC uses significantly less memory for my use case compared to both 2.2 and Coherence."<br><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">2008/10/19 Manik Surtani <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:manik@jboss.org">manik@jboss.org</a>></span><br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"><div dir="ltr">lol! thanks, will fix this in trunk now and publish a snapshot of <a href="http://3.0.0." target="_blank">3.0.0.</a><br>
<br><div class="gmail_quote">2008/10/18 Brian Stansberry <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:brian.stansberry@redhat.com" target="_blank">brian.stansberry@redhat.com</a>></span><div><div></div><div class="Wj3C7c"><br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">Elias Ross was kind enough to notify me privately that the difference in method signature isn't the generics (which of course don't matter at runtime), it's the change in return type from CacheFactory to DefaultCacheFactory. DOH!<br>
<br>
Maxim: if the only remaining answer is impossible, don't decide the impossible is the answer. Look again and see the blindingly obvious possible answer. :-)<div><div></div><div><br>
<br>
Brian Stansberry wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
Sorry, Manik, tests were failing w/ NoSuchMethodError and I saw your recent change in hibernate trunk to remove use of DefaultCacheFactory.getInstance() and assumed the method was gone. My bad :-(<br>
<br>
Perhaps problem is loss of generics info in the class file?<br>
<br>
<a href="http://2.1.0.GA" target="_blank">2.1.0.GA</a>:<br>
<br>
public static <K, V> CacheFactory<K, V> getInstance()<br>
<br>
3.0.0.CR1:<br>
<br>
public static DefaultCacheFactory getInstance()<br>
<br>
Failure I see is:<br>
<br>
java.lang.NoSuchMethodError: org.jboss.cache.DefaultCacheFactory.getInstance()Lorg/jboss/cache/CacheFactory; <br>
at org.hibernate.cache.jbc2.builder.SharedCacheInstanceManager.createSharedCache(SharedCacheInstanceManager.java:193) <br>
<br>
<br>
I don't remember exactly how I tested this yesterday, but messing with it today, I can reproduce by:<br>
<br>
1) revert pom in my checkout of the 3.3.1 tag so it uses JBC <a href="http://2.1.0.GA" target="_blank">2.1.0.GA</a><br>
2) revert any compiled classes back to the original 3.3.1<br>
mvn -Dmaven.test.skip.exec=true clean install<br>
<br>
3) change the pom so it uses JBC 3.3.0.CR1 and JGroups 2.6.5<br>
4) run the testsuite<br>
<br>
mvn -Ptest test<br>
....<br>
Tests run: 225, Failures: 0, Errors: 21, Skipped: 0<br>
<br>
5) force a new compile and then retest:<br>
<br>
mvn -Ptest clean test<br>
...<br>
Tests run: 225, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0<br>
<br>
<br>
Problem is people using a 3.3.1 binary don't get to recompile. ;)<br>
<br>
Manik Surtani wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
Weird, getInstance() was removed in early ALPHAs, and was replaced again pretty quickly - in 3.0.0.BETA1, even.<br>
<br>
<a href="http://fisheye.jboss.org/browse/JBossCache/core/tags/3.0.0.BETA1/src/main/java/org/jboss/cache/DefaultCacheFactory.java?r=6676" target="_blank">http://fisheye.jboss.org/browse/JBossCache/core/tags/3.0.0.BETA1/src/main/java/org/jboss/cache/DefaultCacheFactory.java?r=6676</a> <br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
2008/10/18 Jason T. Greene <<a href="mailto:jason.greene@redhat.com" target="_blank">jason.greene@redhat.com</a> <mailto:<a href="mailto:jason.greene@redhat.com" target="_blank">jason.greene@redhat.com</a>>><br>
<br>
Brian Stansberry wrote:<br>
<br>
Steve Ebersole wrote:<br>
<br>
so JBC 3 needs this change anyway? <br>
Yes, if it wants to go in, say, JBoss AS 5.2. Which I'm quite<br>
sure the JBC team wants, since they made a bunch of other more<br>
significant changes to ensure compatibility. This one's real<br>
trivial.<br>
<br>
at which point it would be a total<br>
drop-in replacement?<br>
<br>
<br>
Yes. I just did a diff between head of trunk (which passes 100%<br>
w/ JBC 3.0.0.CR1 plugged in) and the <a href="http://hibernate-3.3.1.GA" target="_blank">hibernate-3.3.1.GA</a><br>
<<a href="http://hibernate-3.3.1.GA" target="_blank">http://hibernate-3.3.1.GA</a>> tag and the only differences are two<br>
places where the missing DefaultCacheFactory.getInstance() call<br>
was replaced.<br>
<br>
<br>
I fixed this compatibility problem awhile ago, but it could have<br>
been after CR1 was tagged.<br>
<br>
-- Jason T. Greene<br>
<br>
JBoss, a division of Red Hat<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
jbosscache-dev mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:jbosscache-dev@lists.jboss.org" target="_blank">jbosscache-dev@lists.jboss.org</a> <mailto:<a href="mailto:jbosscache-dev@lists.jboss.org" target="_blank">jbosscache-dev@lists.jboss.org</a>><br>
<a href="https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbosscache-dev" target="_blank">https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbosscache-dev</a><br>
<br>
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
<br>
-- <br>
Brian Stansberry<br>
Lead, AS Clustering<br>
JBoss, a division of Red Hat<br>
<a href="mailto:brian.stansberry@redhat.com" target="_blank">brian.stansberry@redhat.com</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div></div></div><br></div>
</blockquote></div><br></div>