[infinispan-dev] New Cache Entry Notifications

[William Burns]

On Mon, Feb 3, 2014 at 11:07 AM, Galder Zamarreño <galder at redhat.com> wrote:
>
> On 23 Jan 2014, at 18:54, Mircea Markus <mmarkus at redhat.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> On Jan 23, 2014, at 5:48 PM, William Burns <mudokonman at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hello all,
>>>
>>> I have been working with notifications and most recently I have come
>>> to look into events generated when a new entry is created.  Now
>>> normally I would just expect a CacheEntryCreatedEvent to be raised.
>>> However we currently raise a CacheEntryModifiedEvent event and then a
>>> CacheEntryCreatedEvent.  I notice that there are comments around the
>>> code saying that tests require both to be fired.
>>
>> it doesn't sound right to me: modified is different than created.
>
> I've lost count the number of times I've raised this up in the dev mailing list :|
>
> And, if CacheEntryModifiedEvent has a method called isCreated(), is cos I added it in order to differentiate between a modify and a create without breaking backwards compatibility and expectations of events to be received. Just need to trace back the jira issue number, and associated forum threads ;) :p

Ah nice I didn't even notice the method until you pointed it out.

>
>>
>>>
>>> I am wondering if anyone has an objection to only raising a
>>> CacheEntryCreatedEvent on a new cache entry being created.
>
> It'd break expectations of existing applications that expect certain events. It's a very difficult one to swallow.

I agree. Maybe I should change to if anyone minds if Cluster Listeners
only raise the CacheEntryModifiedEvent on an entry creation for
cluster listeners instead?  This wouldn't break existing assumptions
since we don't currently support Cluster Listeners.  The only thing is
it wouldn't be consistent with regular listeners...


>
> Plus, there's JCache specifications, which adds listeners, and gets them right. Eventually everyone should move towards that.

Just to be clear you are saying the JCache only raises a single event
for change and create right?

>
>>> Does
>>> anyone know why we raise both currently?
>
> Legacy really.
>
>>> Was it just so the
>>> PutKeyValueCommand could more ignorantly just raise the
>>> CacheEntryModified pre Event?
>>>
>>> Any input would be appreciated, Thanks.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> --
>> Mircea Markus
>> Infinispan lead (www.infinispan.org)
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> infinispan-dev mailing list
>> infinispan-dev at lists.jboss.org
>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev
>
>
> --
> Galder Zamarreño
> galder at redhat.com
> twitter.com/galderz
>
> Project Lead, Escalante
> http://escalante.io
>
> Engineer, Infinispan
> http://infinispan.org
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> infinispan-dev mailing list
> infinispan-dev at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev