Re: [infinispan-dev] RemoteCache vs BasicCache

On 8 July 2013 20:37, Mircea Markus <mmarkus(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: > TBH I think having the RemoteCache implementing Cache wasn't such a good idea as it caused confusion through users: e.g. people trying to use transactions with a remote cache. I like the multiple interfaces idea as it clearly indicates what's actually supported in both remote and embedded modes. Right that has been confusing, but now we also have evidence of people specifically demanding to have the same query functionality (same = exact same API) in remote as in embedded. Yes we have different functionality, but also there is a good value in being able to easily switch a client from embedded vs remote .. what about we maintain two different interfaces but having a shared parent? We would then try to define as much as possible in the common Cache interface, and regularly promote features from the lower interfaces to the upper ones when the functionality is covered by both. In terms of practical development it's self-evident that we'll always be a step ahead in embedded mode, so we should design for it rather than trying to prevent it.