[infinispan-dev] Ditching ASYNC modes for REPL/DIST/INV/CacheStores?

[Bela Ban]

At the JGroups level, ASYNC generates *less* traffic than SYNC. So if 
you do sync under the cover and use a future to make it async at the API 
level, you're incurring more overhead, namely the messages sending back 
the responses.

Not sure about the Infinispan async API, but I'd assume this would also 
use more threads.

On 31/01/14 08:08, Galder Zamarreño wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> The following came to my mind yesterday: I think we should ditch
> ASYNC modes for DIST/REPL/INV and our async cache store
> functionality.
>
> Instead, whoever wants to store something asyncronously should use
> asynchronous methods, i.e. call putAsync. So, this would mean that
> when you call put(), it's always sync. This would reduce the
> complexity and configuration of our code base, without affecting our
> functionality, and it would make things more logical IMO.
>
> WDYT?
>
> Cheers, -- Galder Zamarreño galder at redhat.com twitter.com/galderz
>
> Project Lead, Escalante http://escalante.io
>
> Engineer, Infinispan http://infinispan.org
>
>
> _______________________________________________ infinispan-dev
> mailing list infinispan-dev at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev
>

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