[infinispan-dev] Feedback and requests on clustered and remote listeners
mmarkus at redhat.com
Tue Sep 23 10:38:20 EDT 2014
On Sep 23, 2014, at 17:27, William Burns <mudokonman at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> Will, what would be the overall impact on the A
>>> The biggest part is the usage with the cluster iterator. Currently
>>> the Listener uses the same filter that it is provided to also do the
>>> iteration. If we want to go down the line of having the extra
>>> interface(s), which overall I do like, then I am thinking we may want
>>> to change the Listener annotation to no longer have an
>>> includeCurrentState parameter and instead add a new method to the
>>> addListener method of Cache that takes a KeyValueFilter and the new
>>> UpdateFilter (as well as the 2 converters).
>> Do we still want to keep the KeyValueFilter method or replace it entirely with the UpdateFilter version?
> In this case I would assume this new UpdateFilter would be completely
> separate (doesn't extend) and would not contain the KeyValueFilter
> method. Also I would think UpdateFilter would live only in the
> notifications package as it doesn't make much sense outside of this
> context (the others would stay in filter package).
that's how I thought about it as well
Infinispan lead (www.infinispan.org)
More information about the infinispan-dev