> We can, but the users that want to use both TO transactional
caches and non transactional caches on the same transport - a pretty common scenario IMO -
would have to add the seqeuncer to the jgroups configuration by hand.
Why not have 2 separate channels, but both residing on the same shared
transport. I think Infinispan is injected a shared transport anyway, but
AS, so this could be reused...
Not sure on the details though, you'd have to talk to Paul for clarification
I'm not taking about 2 different caches on different CacheManagers here (this would
support two transports) but two caches (one TO tx and the other non-transactional) on the
same CacheManager: in this situation they share the same channel instance.
> As the seqeuncer doesn't harm performance, why not have it
there by
default?
Because this suggests total order when looking at the config. A user
looking at the config, doesn't know that we're secretly bypassing SEQUENCER.
We already do that with bundling, i.e. secretly not-bundle the sync messages even though
bundling is enabled in the configs by default.