On 13 Apr 2010, at 11:01, Manik Surtani wrote: > > On 13 Apr 2010, at 10:50, Sanne Grinovero wrote: > >> rightfull concern, I wouldn't personally have expected that but I'm >> biased as I follow this thread; it's not hard to imagine some people >> falling in this trap. > > > Yes; how do we make sure no one falls into this trap? :) How about: > > cache.affinityKey("Blah").put(k, v) > > The problem with "group" or even location/locality/colocation is that they can all be misconstrued to mean "scope". With something like "affinity", I suppose it is clearer? Here is an alternative - *do* we want to support scoping? By this, I mean: cache.withAffinityKey("k1").put("name", "Manik"); cache.withAffinityKey("k1").put("country", "UK"); cache.withAffinityKey("k2").put("name", "Sanne"); cache.withAffinityKey("k2").put("country", "IT"); will be allowed and the two will not overwrite each other, *but* you cannot retrieve stuff by simply doing: cache.get("name") anymore. You would have to do: cache.withAffinityKey("k1").get("name"). Simply doing a cache.get("name") will return a null. What do people prefer?

Cheers Manik -- Manik Surtani manik(a)jboss.org Lead, Infinispan Lead, JBoss Cache http://www.infinispan.org http://www.jbosscache.org _______________________________________________ infinispan-dev mailing list infinispan-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev