Re: [infinispan-dev] RemoteCache vs BasicCache
On 9 July 2013 18:13, Mircea Markus <mmarkus(a)redhat.com> wrote:
On 9 Jul 2013, at 20:07, Sanne Grinovero <sanne(a)infinispan.org> wrote:
> On 9 July 2013 18:01, Mircea Markus <mmarkus(a)redhat.com> wrote:
>>
>> On 9 Jul 2013, at 13:47, Sanne Grinovero <sanne(a)infinispan.org> wrote:
>>
>>> Indeed that's an excellent idea. But I would add also a common parent
>>> interface having the basic functionality common to all.
>>
>> If ConcurrentMap doesn't have what we need, of course :-)
>
> ConcurrentMap adds a load of pitfalls which should not be there: all
> the methods whose result is depending on the node they are run on.
>
> I know we make it clear in javadocs and several warnings on the doc,
> but experience tells that this is not good enough :-(
>
> I'd propose to remove them all, and provide an adapter layer
> (optional) for those needing to replace a ConcurrentMap in their code.
> Methods like "size()" - as discussed before - are possibly useful for
> statistics and diagnostics, and therefore should be accessed in a
> different explicit way.
>
> cache.diagnosticsStatistics().localContainerSize()
+1. That would be part of the migration towards to JCache API and implemented in 7.0. I
think Tristan was looking for something now.
I see. But since we plan a change anyway, why not doing the right
thing right away? Ok we can change interfaces on mayor versions, still
the less you change them the better: any change is a big pain for
other projects.
Unless Tristan was looking for something backwards compatible right
now? Of course I'd prefer that, I was making suggestions assuming the
interface chain would change now in some non-compabile way.
Cheers,
Sanne
Cheers,
--
Mircea Markus
Infinispan lead (www.infinispan.org)
_______________________________________________
infinispan-dev mailing list
infinispan-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev