On 22 Jan 2014 16:10, "Pedro Ruivo" <pedro@infinispan.org> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 01/22/2014 01:58 PM, Dan Berindei wrote:
> >
> >
> > It would also require us to keep a Set<K> for each group, with the keys
> > associated with that group. As such, I'm not sure it would be a lot
> > easier to implement (correctly) than FineGrainedAtomicMap.
> >
> >
>
> Dan, I didn't understand why do we need to keep a Set<K>. Can you
> elaborate?

We'd need some way to keep track of the keys that are part of the group, iterating over the entire cache for every getGroup() call would be way too slow.