On 4 Jun 2013, at 13:55, Dan Berindei <dan.berindei(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>> CacheLoaderInterceptor and DistributionInterceptor both
honour the IGNORE_RETURN_VALUES flag for get commands, but I think it would be more useful
if they ignored it - just like they ignore it for conditional commands.
>>
>> That would make it possible for users to only keep a reference to a
cache.getAdvancedCache().withFlags(IGNORE_RETURN_VALUES) and use it for both read and
write operations.
>>
>> What do you think?
>
> If I was to take the role of a colleague of the person who's written the
Infinispan code, it'd be very confused to see a cache reference created with
IGNORE_RETURN_VALUES being used for a get() operation… I can see myself thinking:
"Why on earth do you call get with IGNORE_RETURN_VALUES?"
Isn't Galder's point not to allow invoking get with IGNORE_RETURN_VALUES? As both
of you pointed out, Get + IGNORE_RETURN_VALUES doesn't make any sense :-)
You'd think conditional operations with IGNORE_RETURN_VALUES don't make sense
either, yet we have a special case to handle those as if the flag wasn't present :)
I guess you're referring to ISPN-3141?
Still I think Get + IGNORE_RETURN_VALUES doesn't make any sense :-)
Cheers,
--
Mircea Markus
Infinispan lead (
www.infinispan.org)