On 11 Sep 2006, at 21:59, Bela Ban wrote:
Vladimir Blagojevic wrote:
> I made TcpCacheLoader test pass but tcpcacheloader will not propagate
> load/store. This was the case even before I made the cacheloader
> change.
> Similar situation is with rpc and rmi loaders and we have to
> figure out
> what to do there.
Should we dump (= move to the obsolete dir) Rpc and RMI cache
loaders ? I would at least ask in the forums whether anyone is
using these. That way, fewer options to support.
Do we dump them purely to make our lives easier, or because the use
case is obsolete? Do we have reason to believe the latter?
> It would be great if someone familiar with bdjecacheloader can
> make it
> compatible with streaming format.
It was written by a Sleepycat employee first. Now, if we follow
through with Vladimir's recent thoughts, we can pull most of the
streaming (and cache loader handling) logic into the cache loader/
store interceptors, so cache loader impls themselves will be
trivial. Thus, we would only have to change code in one place.
Suggestions ?
I agree with this - but just to re-iterate, the only improvement here
is formalising the format of state stored in the loaders, am I correct?
Or is it more like removing load/store state methods on the cache
loader interface altogether and let the interceptors deal with this
using loader.put()/get() calls - since this is what happens
internally (within the cloader impl) anyway?