Re: [infinispan-dev] changes introduced by optimistic transactions

Hi Mircea, what you propose has a strong impact on existing use cases. Not having batching kills the Lucene performance, and using transactions is not an option unless the whole state of the index can fit in memory, which is not the use case we're targeting: I need to be able to use both on the same Cache. Isn't it possible to have a batching implementation which doesn't rely on transactions, or why are you needing to add this limitation? If not, I'll have to start thinking about a different design.. not happy about it since we got much testing from the community and I would consider it quite stable now, but especially the performance tests are not something I can easily reproduce on my own as it implies big indexes, real clusters and real world use cases. What we could do, is implement batching in the Lucene Directory itself ( a layer above Infinispan); that could work, but then again I don't see why this could not be generalized and provide to everyone, keeping the change less traumatic.. I'm likely not the only user of this API.