While we could define the behaviour as in 3), I think that this is most
Yeah rereading what I wrote again, it was definitely misleading. 3) was what I wanted when I first found the issue.
likely a configuration error. Therefore, I'd go with 1), and ideally
That is what I was leaning towards as well.
provide a link to FAQ/docs where you'd explain what exactly happened in
the exception message.
Yeah I will make sure we have some stuff added to the template section of the user guide.
R.
On 02/27/2017 03:31 PM, William Burns wrote:
> When working on another project using Infinispan the code being used
> was a bit interesting and I don't think our template configuration
> handling was expecting it do so in such a way.
>
> Essentially the code defined a template for a distributed cache as
> well as some named caches. Then whenever a cache is retrieved it would
> pass the given name and always the distributed cache template.
> Unfortunately with the way templates work they essentially redefine a
> cache first so the actual cache configuration was wiped out. In this
> example I was able to get the code to change to using a default cache
> instead, which is the behavior that is needed.
>
> The issue though at hand is whether we should allow a user to call
> getCache in such a way. My initial thought is to have it throw some
> sort of configuration exception when this is invoked. But there are
> some possible options.
>
> 1. Throw a configuration exception not allowing a user to use a
> template with an already defined cache. This has a slight disconnect
> between configuration and runtime, since if a user adds a new
> definition it could cause runtime issues.
> 2. Log an error/warning message when this occurs. Is this enough
> though? Still could have runtime issues that are possibly undetected.
> 3. Merge the configurations together applying the template first.
> This would be akin to how default cache works currently, but you would
> get to define your default template configuration at runtime. This
> sounded like the best option to me, but the problem is what if someone
> calls getCache using the same cache name but a different template.
> This could get hairy as well.
>
> Really thinking about the future, disconnecting the cache definition
> and retrieval would be the best option, but we can't do that this late
> in the game.
>
> What do you guys think?
>
> - Will
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> infinispan-dev mailing list
> infinispan-dev@lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev
--
Radim Vansa <rvansa@redhat.com>
JBoss Performance Team
_______________________________________________
infinispan-dev mailing list
infinispan-dev@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev