Re: [infinispan-dev] Configuration visitor - Re: [JBoss JIRA] Commented: (ISPN-145) No transport and singleton store enabled should not be allowed

Hi Vladimir, I had a look at the implementation and I'm not sure I understand the need for the reflection visit calls in AbstractConfigurationBeanVisitor. Using reflection makes harder to follow code and it's slower than typed calls and I'm not sure of the reason to use it here.

Also, I don't see the need for a standard ConfigurationValidatingVisitor that does such validation. Instead, the way I see it working is SingletonStoreConfig having some kind of callback method being called, i.e. the traversalCompleted() call and within it, SingletonStoreConfig can, using the ComponentRegistry, retrieve the Transport component and see if it's set or not. Or alternatively, SingletonStoreConfig could use the passed InfinispanConfiguration to do its validation.

To sum up, I think each AbstractNamedCacheConfigurationBean implementation should, if it requires to, have the ability to validate the configuration via some kind of callback. Such callback should probably is possibliy traversalCompleted() itself. WDYT? On 09/09/2009 08:21 PM, Vladimir Blagojevic wrote: > Hi, > > Galder and I talked about this offline. Time to involve you guys! > > I just completed visitor pattern for our configuration objects. > Visitor > is passed from root of configuration - InfinispanConfiguration > object. > InfinispanConfiguration class has a new method: > > public void accept(ConfigurationBeanVisitor v) > > How do we want to integrate this visitor into existing structure? > > 1) We add a new factory method to InfinispanConfiguration with > additional ConfigurationBeanVisitor parameter > > 2) We leave everything as is and if there is a need to pass some > visitor > we pass it to InfinispanConfiguration instance directly (from > DefaultCacheManager) > > DefaultCacheManager will pass ValidationVisitor to > InfinispanConfiguration that will verify configuration semantically. > > Regards, > Vladimir > > On 09-09-09 10:19 AM, Galder Zamarreno wrote: >> Good idea :) >> >> On 09/09/2009 04:13 PM, Vladimir Blagojevic wrote: >>> Yeah, >>> >>> I was thinking that we can make a visitor for configuration tree >>> and >>> then you can do verification of any node and other things as >>> well. Use >>> cases will come up in the future for sure. >>> >>> Cheers >>> >>> >>> >>> On 09-09-09 3:29 AM, Galder Zamarreno (JIRA) wrote: >>>> [ >>>> https://jira.jboss.org/jira/browse/ISPN-145?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugi... >>>> #action_12484894 >>>> >>>> ] >>>> >>>> Galder Zamarreno commented on ISPN-145: >>>> --------------------------------------- >>>> >>>> Not sure I understand what you mean by generic though. You mean >>>> any >>>> component to have a validation step of some sort? >>>> >>>> Thanks for taking this on :) >>>> >>>>> No transport and singleton store enabled should not be allowed >>>>> -------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>> >>>>> Key: ISPN-145 >>>>> URL: https://jira.jboss.org/jira/browse/ISPN-145 >>>>> Project: Infinispan >>>>> Issue Type: Bug >>>>> Components: Loaders and Stores >>>>> Affects Versions: 4.0.0.ALPHA6 >>>>> Reporter: Galder Zamarreno >>>>> Assignee: Vladimir Blagojevic >>>>> Priority: Minor >>>>> Fix For: 4.0.0.CR1 >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Throw configuration exception if singleton store configured >>>>> without >>>>> transport having been configured. >>>>> It makes no sense to have singleton store enabled when there's no >>>>> transport. >>> >> > > _______________________________________________ > infinispan-dev mailing list > infinispan-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev -- Galder Zamarreño Sr. Software Engineer Infinispan, JBoss Cache _______________________________________________ infinispan-dev mailing list infinispan-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev