Re: [infinispan-dev] Design change in Infinispan Query
On Feb 25, 2014, at 3:46 PM, Adrian Nistor <anistor(a)gmail.com> wrote:
They can do what they please. Either put multiple types in one basket
or put them in separate caches (one type per cache). But allowing / recommending is one
thing, mandating it is a different story.
There's no reason to forbid _any_ of these scenarios / mandate one over the other!
There was previously in this thread some suggestion of mandating the one type per cache
usage. -1 for it
Agreed. I actually don't see how we can enforce people that declare
Cache<Object,Object> not put whatever they want in it. Also makes total sense for
smaller caches as it is easy to set up etc.
The debate in this email, the way I understood it, was: are/should people using multiple
caches for storing data? If yes we should consider querying functionality spreading over
multiple caches.
On Tue, Feb 25, 2014 at 5:08 PM, Mircea Markus <mmarkus(a)redhat.com> wrote:
On Feb 25, 2014, at 9:28 AM, Emmanuel Bernard <emmanuel(a)hibernate.org> wrote:
>> On 24 févr. 2014, at 17:39, Mircea Markus <mmarkus(a)redhat.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> On Feb 17, 2014, at 10:13 PM, Emmanuel Bernard
<emmanuel(a)hibernate.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> By the way, Mircea, Sanne and I had quite a long discussion about this one
and the idea of one cache per entity. It turns out that the right (as in easy) solution
does involve a higher level programming model like OGM provides. You can simulate it
yourself using the Infinispan APIs but it is just cumbersome.
>>
>> Curious to hear the whole story :-)
>> We cannot mandate all the suers to use OGM though, one of the reasons being OGM
is not platform independent (hotrod).
>
> Then solve all the issues I have raised with a magic wand and come back to me when
you have done it, I'm interested.
People are going to use infinispan with one cache per entity, because it makes sense:
- different config (repl/dist | persistent/non-persistent) for different data types
- have map/reduce tasks running only the Person entires not on Dog as well, when you want
to select (Person) where age > 18
I don't see a reason to forbid this, on the contrary. The way I see it the relation
between (OGM, ISPN) <=> (Hibernate, JDBC). Indeed OGM would be a better abstraction
and should be recommended as such for the Java clients, but ultimately we're a general
purpose storage engine that is available to different platforms as well.
Cheers,
--
Mircea Markus
Infinispan lead (www.infinispan.org)
Cheers,
--
Mircea Markus
Infinispan lead (www.infinispan.org)