[infinispan-dev] Calling getCache with a template and defined configuration

[Dan Berindei]

I would go for option 2.

We already started disconnecting the cache definition and retrieval,
at least `getCache(name)` doesn't define a new cache based on the
default configuration any more. So I don't think it would be too much,
even at this point, to deprecate all the overloads of `getCache` that
can define a new cache and advise users to use `defineConfiguration`
instead.



Cheers
Dan


On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 4:31 PM, William Burns <mudokonman at gmail.com> wrote:
> When working on another project using Infinispan the code being used was a
> bit interesting and I don't think our template configuration handling was
> expecting it do so in such a way.
>
> Essentially the code defined a template for a distributed cache as well as
> some named caches.  Then whenever a cache is retrieved it would pass the
> given name and always the distributed cache template.  Unfortunately with
> the way templates work they essentially redefine a cache first so the actual
> cache configuration was wiped out.  In this example I was able to get the
> code to change to using a default cache instead, which is the behavior that
> is needed.
>
> The issue though at hand is whether we should allow a user to call getCache
> in such a way. My initial thought is to have it throw some sort of
> configuration exception when this is invoked. But there are some possible
> options.
>
> 1. Throw a configuration exception not allowing a user to use a template
> with an already defined cache. This has a slight disconnect between
> configuration and runtime, since if a user adds a new definition it could
> cause runtime issues.
> 2. Log an error/warning message when this occurs. Is this enough though?
> Still could have runtime issues that are possibly undetected.
> 3. Merge the configurations together applying the template first.  This
> would be akin to how default cache works currently, but you would get to
> define your default template configuration at runtime. This sounded like the
> best option to me, but the problem is what if someone calls getCache using
> the same cache name but a different template. This could get hairy as well.
>
> Really thinking about the future, disconnecting the cache definition and
> retrieval would be the best option, but we can't do that this late in the
> game.
>
> What do you guys think?
>
>  - Will
>
> _______________________________________________
> infinispan-dev mailing list
> infinispan-dev at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev