[infinispan-dev] To bundle or not to bundle is the question

[Bela Ban]

On 11/8/13 4:15 PM, Radim Vansa wrote:
> First of all, I think that naming "old", "new" where 3.2.7 new == 3.4.0
> old sucks. Let's use some more meaningful names.

Even better: I named the latest bundler "latest" ha ha :-)

These names were never supposed to be exposed to the user, only to 
experts, but +1 on better names... Suggestions ? "default_bundler", 
"default_bundler2" and "transfer_queue_bundler" ? :-)

> Changing the DONT_BUNDLE flag to apply on network communication but
> rather to stack processing isn't a bad idea, if it helps performance.
> However, changing the flag meaning to be dependent on the bundler type
> sounds rather confusing.

The idea is that when the battle is over, only one bundler will be used, 
so we don't need to make this distinction. However, the "old" bundler 
(which I want to kill at some point) would not perform well when 
bundling all messages.


> Radim
>
> On 11/08/2013 11:47 AM, Bela Ban wrote:
>> I think I'll ignore the DONT_BUNDLE flag on the sender's side if we have
>> the right bundler in place. Take a look at [1] and let me know what you
>> think...
>>
>> [1] https://issues.jboss.org/browse/JGRP-1737
>>
>
>

-- 
Bela Ban, JGroups lead (http://www.jgroups.org)