Re: [infinispan-dev] IRC chat: HB + I9

Hi all, I've just finished integrating Infinispan with a HB 6.x branch Steve had, all tests pass now [1]. Yeah, we didn't commit on the final location for these changes. As far as I know, Hibernate master is not 6.x, but rather 5.2.x. There's no 5.2.x branch in Hibernate main repo. 6.x is just a branch that Steve has. These are the options availble to us: 1. Integrate 9.x provider as part of 'hibernate-infinispan' in Hibernate 6.x branch. 2. Integrate 9.x provider as part of a second Infinispan module in Hibernate 5.x branch. 3. Integrate 9.x provider as part of 'hibernate-infinispan' in Hibernate 5.x branch. This is problematic for since the provider is not backwards compatible. 4. Integrate 9.x provider in infinispan and deliver it as part of Infinispan rather than Hibernate. I'm not sure which one I prefer the most TBH... 1. is the ideal solution but doesn't seem there will be a Hibernate 6.x release for a while. 2./3./4. all have their downsides... :\ Thoughts? [1] https://github.com/galderz/hibernate-orm/commits/t_i9x_v2 -- Galder Zamarreño Infinispan, Red Hat > On 16 May 2017, at 17:06, Paul Ferraro <paul.ferraro(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: > > Thanks Galder. I read through the infinispan-dev thread on the > subject, but I'm not sure what was concluded regarding the eventual > home for this code. > Once the testsuite passes, is the plan to commit to hibernate master? > If so, I will likely fork these changes into a WF module (and adapt it > for Hibernate 5.1.x) so that WF12 can move to JGroups4+Infinispan9 > until Hibernate6 is integrated. > > Radim - one thing you mentioned on that infinispan-dev thread puzzled > me: you said that invalidation mode offers no benefits over > replication. How is that possible? Can you elaborate? > > Paul > > On Tue, May 16, 2017 at 9:03 AM, Galder Zamarreño <galder(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: >> I'm on the move, not sure if Paul/Radim saw my replies: >> >> <pferraro> galderz, rvansa: Hey guys - is there a plan for Hibernate & >> ISPN 9? >> <rvansa> pferraro: Galder has been working on that >> <rvansa> pferraro: though I haven't seen any results but a list of >> stuff that needs to be changed >> <pferraro> galderz: which Hibernate branch are you targeting? >> <rvansa> pferraro: 5.2, but there are minute differences between 5.x >> in terms of the parts that need love to get Infinispan 9 support >> *** Mode change: +v vblagoje on #infinispan by ChanServ >> (ChanServ@services.) >> <pferraro> rvansa: are you suggesting that 5.0 or 5.1 branches will be >> adapted to additionally support infinispan 9? how is that >> possible? >>> pferraro: i'm working on it as we speak... >>> pferraro: down to 16 failuresd >>> pferraro: i started a couple of months ago, but had talks/demos to >> prepare >>> pferraro: i've got back to working on it this week >> ... >>> pferraro: rvansa >>> rvansa: minute differences my ass ;p >>> pferraro: did you see my replies? >>> i got disconnected while replying... >> <pferraro> hmm - no - I didn't >> <pferraro> galderz: ^ >>> pferraro: so, working on the HB + I9 integration as we speak >>> pferraro: i started a couple of months back but had talks/demos to >> prepare and had to put that aside >>> pferraro: i'm down to 16 failures >>> pferraro: serious refactoring required of the integration to get it >> to compile and the tests to pass >>> pferraro: need to switch to async interceptor stack in 2lc >> integration and get all the subtle changes right >>> pferraro: it's a painstaking job basically >>> pferraro: i'm working on >> https://github.com/galderz/hibernate-orm/tree/t_i9x_v2 >>> pferraro: i can't remember where i branched off, but it's a branch >> that steve had since master was focused on 5.x >>> pferraro: i've no idea when/where we'll integrate this, but one >> thing is for sure: it's nowhere near backwards compatible >>> actually, fixed one this morning, so down to 15 failures >>> pferraro: any suggestions/wishes? >>> is anyone out there? ;) >> Cheers, >> -- >> Galder Zamarreño >> Infinispan, Red Hat >>