Got it, Thanks -----Original Message----- From: Robert Varga [mailto:n...@hq.sk] Sent: Monday, August 22, 2016 5:17 PM To: Sela, Guy <guy.s...@hpe.com>; mdsal-...@lists.opendaylight.org; controller-dev@lists.opendaylight.org Subject: Re: [controller-dev] [mdsal-dev] onDataTreeChanged() Proxies / LadyDataObject
On 08/22/2016 03:45 PM, Sela, Guy wrote: > It will be done on the BI level in the final product. > Right now, just trying to quickly create something for a demo. > > Thanks. > > Can you elaborate on the second reason for the Proxies? > Why the fact that the Binding is specified as interfaces is an argument for > working with a Proxy? The alternative is to perform full instantiation, which is wasteful for the typical case where only a small subset of the subscribed tree -- from both memory and CPU usage perspective. Furthermore it would prevent optimizations in the (very typical) BI->BA->BI case, forcing an additional transcoding step. Now, we *could* generate classes at runtime to perform the equivalent, but that is really reinventing the wheel, as this is use case is java.lang.reflect.Proxy's raison d'etre. Bye, Robert _______________________________________________ controller-dev mailing list controller-dev@lists.opendaylight.org https://lists.opendaylight.org/mailman/listinfo/controller-dev
