[infinispan-dev] Moving functional API to core

[William Burns]

On Tue, Jun 13, 2017, 3:54 AM Radim Vansa <rvansa at redhat.com> wrote:

> On 06/12/2017 04:52 PM, William Burns wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Sat, Jun 10, 2017 at 12:56 AM Radim Vansa <rvansa at redhat.com
> > <mailto:rvansa at redhat.com>> wrote:
> >
> >     Hi guys,
> >
> >     when the functional API has been outline, the interfaces were put
> into
> >     infinispan-commons to make it possible to share these between remote
> >     clients and embedded use case. However, it seems that reusing this
> >     as-is
> >     impossible or at least impractical as we cannot send the lambdas in a
> >     language neutral way. In the future, we may implement a way to share
> >     functions between client and a server but that will most likely
> result
> >     in an interface accepting something else than
> Function<ReadWriteEntry,
> >     R>. Also, it's rather weird to have two EntryVersion interfaces.
> >
> >     Therefore I suggest moving org.infinispan.commons.api.functional to
> >     infinispan-core, package org.infinispan.api.functional
> >
> >     You might say that the server-side code would use the interfaces, but
> >     once it's running on server, it should depend on core (or core-api) -
> >     commons is what is shared with the client, and if the client will in
> >     future register a new function on the server, the user code should
> >     depend on core-api as well (client-hotrod itself does not have to).
> >
> >     If you wonder what led me to this is that I've tried to add
> >     SerializableFunction overloads to the FunctionalMap and found out
> that
> >     SerializableFunction et all are only in infinispan-core (for good).
> >
> >
> > We could move these into commons in a major version if we need to as
> > well. I never thought about using them in the client code as we never
> > planned on supporting serialized lambdas there, but if it makes other
> > things easier I am for it.
> >
> > Also there is nothing stopping us from having these in commons right
> > now, there is nothing special about the interfaces, they can just be
> > copied over.
>
> -1 These can't be simply copied, because two modules cannot share a
> package name (org.infinispan.util), therefore we would have to move the
> SerializableFunction to org.infinispan.commons.util.function.


I never said they had to be on the same package :-P

But as you
> say; we can't/don't want to support lambdas in any remote client
> operations and therefore these would be superfluous in commons.


> We have to think about a pattern for the building-blocks (counters,
> locks, multimaps...): in embedded case we want to expose API using
> lambdas, in remote client this should be named filter, script or Ickle
> query. Obvious solution is having BaseFeature -> EmbeddedFeature,
> RemoteFeature that would expose the functional operations symmetrically
> but with different API, but it seems to me a bit inelegant.
>

This is always our problem, we never have a solution and then client API
falls behind.

Also even though we wouldn't serialize lambdas with client, doesn't mean we
can't use lambdas with the client. Just means the operation would have
slower performance, since it would be evaluated in the client.

I personally welcome the BaseFeature you mentioned because we need that
asap so that we can create these API while maintaining some type of
semblance between them.


> Note that embedded/remote building blocks will have different
> properties/behaviour anyway - e.g. for embedded it could be useful to
> execute an action once the 'owning node' crashes (e.g. release a lock)
> while it does not make much sense with remote client.
>
> Radim
>
> >
> >     Please let me know if you have objections/if there something I
> >     have missed.
> >
> >     Radim
> >
> >     --
> >     Radim Vansa <rvansa at redhat.com <mailto:rvansa at redhat.com>>
> >     JBoss Performance Team
> >
> >     _______________________________________________
> >     infinispan-dev mailing list
> >     infinispan-dev at lists.jboss.org <mailto:
> infinispan-dev at lists.jboss.org>
> >     https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > infinispan-dev mailing list
> > infinispan-dev at lists.jboss.org
> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev
>
>
> --
> Radim Vansa <rvansa at redhat.com>
> JBoss Performance Team
>
> _______________________________________________
> infinispan-dev mailing list
> infinispan-dev at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/infinispan-dev/attachments/20170613/1ed141e5/attachment.html