On 01/27/2014 09:20 AM, Sanne Grinovero wrote:
On 23 January 2014 18:03, Dan Berindei <dan.berindei(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
>
> On 22 Jan 2014 16:10, "Pedro Ruivo" <pedro(a)infinispan.org> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On 01/22/2014 01:58 PM, Dan Berindei wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> It would also require us to keep a Set<K> for each group, with the
keys
>>> associated with that group. As such, I'm not sure it would be a lot
>>> easier to implement (correctly) than FineGrainedAtomicMap.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Dan, I didn't understand why do we need to keep a Set<K>. Can you
>> elaborate?
>
>
> We'd need some way to keep track of the keys that are part of the group,
> iterating over the entire cache for every getGroup() call would be way too
> slow.
Right, and load all entries from any CacheStore too :-/
IMO, I prefer to iterate over the data container and cache loader when
it is needed than keep the Set<K> for each group. I think the memory
will thank you
_______________________________________________
infinispan-dev mailing list
infinispan-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev