<p>I would like to try it in combination with the Lucene Directory, wich uses two or three different caches per index.</p>
<p><blockquote type="cite">
<div bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
Even better this way. I would like to hear more about your reasoning
behind using DT on per-cache basis. Yes, it would be simpler and
easier API for the users but we do not cover uses cases when
distributed task execution needs access to more than one cache
during its execution....<br></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>I was just wondering whether such a use case exists or whether we're just inventing stuff. :-) It would lead to a much more cumbersome API since you'd need to provide a map of cache names to keys, etc.</div>
<p><font color="#500050"><br><br>><br>> On 10-12-16 9:07 AM, Manik Surtani wrote:<br>>><br>>><br>>> Hmm. Maybe it is better to not involve an ...</font></p><p><font color="#500050"><br>--<br>Manik Surtani<br>
<a href="mailto:manik@jboss.org">manik@jboss.org</a><br><a href="http://twitter.com/maniksurtani">twitter.com/maniksurtani</a><br><br>Lead, Infinispan<br><a href="http://www.infinispan.o.">http://www.infinispan.o.</a>..</font></p>
<br>_______________________________________________<br>
infinispan-dev mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:infinispan-dev@lists.jboss.org">infinispan-dev@lists.jboss.org</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev" target="_blank">https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev</a><br></p>