On 04/11/2014 02:03 PM, Galder Zamarreño wrote:
On 03 Apr 2014, at 10:05, Dan Berindei <dan.berindei(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
> Don't we want to allow the user to pass some data to the filter factory on
registration?
>
> Otherwise we'd force the user to write a separate filter factory class every time
they want to track changes to a single key.
Possibly, I did consider passing some data from the client to the filter/converter
factory objects, but could not think of a very clean solution. One option would be for the
protocol to specify a vInt, indicating the number of parameters, and then each parameter
as byte[] with its length prepended. A java hot rod client could marshall the parameters
into byte[]. For the server side implementations, they could receive an Object[] as
parameter in the callback with the unmarshalled versions.
From the protocol perspective, byte array is IMO the most simplest =
most elegant. Server implementations must be able to process any byte
array as well (in order to support non-Java clients) - therefore, there
has to be interface accepting raw byte[].
For convenience, we could provide abstract wrapper implementing the
interface, marshalling it into Object[] and passing to abstract method.
Radim
> Cheers
> Dan
>
>
> On Wed, Apr 2, 2014 at 2:14 PM, Galder Zamarreño <galder(a)redhat.com> wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I’ve finally managed to get around to updating the remote hot rod event design
wiki [1].
>>
>> The biggest changes are related to piggybacking on the cluster listeners
functionality in order to for registration/deregistration of listeners and handling
failure scenarios. This should simplify the actual implementation on the Hot Rod side.
>>
>> Based on feedback, I’ve also changed some of the class names so that it’s clearer
what’s client side and what’s server side.
>>
>> A very important change is the fact that source id information has gone. This is
primarily because near-cache like implementations cannot make assumptions on what to store
in the near caches when the client invokes operations. Such implementations need to act
purely on the events received.
>>
>> Finally, a filter/converter plugging mechanism will be done via factory
implementations, which provide more flexibility on the way filter/converter instances are
created. This opens the possibility for filter/converter factory parameters to be added to
the protocol and passed, after unmarshalling, to the factory callbacks (this is not
included right now).
>>
>> I hope to get started on this in the next few days, so feedback at this point is
crucial to get a solid first release.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> [1]
>>
https://github.com/infinispan/infinispan/wiki/Remote-Hot-Rod-Events
>>
>> --
>> Galder Zamarreño
>> galder(a)redhat.com
>>
twitter.com/galderz
>>
>> Project Lead, Escalante
>>
>>
http://escalante.io
>>
>>
>> Engineer, Infinispan
>>
>>
http://infinispan.org
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> infinispan-dev mailing list
>> infinispan-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>>
>>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev
> _______________________________________________
> infinispan-dev mailing list
> infinispan-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev
--
Galder Zamarreño
galder(a)redhat.com
twitter.com/galderz
_______________________________________________
infinispan-dev mailing list
infinispan-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev
--
Radim Vansa <rvansa(a)redhat.com>
JBoss DataGrid QA