Gents, I created tickets for all proposed improvements: 1) Nice async API: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-4475 2) Do not process IO messages synchronously for local node: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-4476 3) Better IgniteFuture API and callback semantics: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-4477
Please review it and let me know if you have any comments. Vladimir. On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 4:32 AM, Dmitriy Setrakyan <dsetrak...@apache.org> wrote: > Would be nice if someone would prototype a new cache API and post the > generated javadoc here. I think we all will benefit from reviewing it. > > On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 12:17 PM, Vladimir Ozerov <voze...@gridgain.com> > wrote: > > > Async API rework is mechanical addition of ~100 methods through > copy-paste. > > Should not take more than a day to implement and more than another day to > > rework tests. > > > > On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 10:00 PM, Dmitriy Setrakyan < > dsetrak...@apache.org > > > > > wrote: > > > > > How difficult is this change? Does not look like it can be done > > overnight. > > > > > > On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 10:46 AM, Vladimir Ozerov < > voze...@gridgain.com> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > We already discussed this several months ago in other thread. > > > > > > > > "Async" methods is the most simple and straight API possible. .NET > > world > > > > goes this way all over their frameworks and nobody died. Hazelcast > also > > > > goes this way. Java goes this way (see CompletableFuture). This is > > common > > > > and well-known practice. The most impacted part of our API will be > > cache, > > > > +33 new methods. Though, I do not see how it can affect learning > curve. > > > > > > > > Agree that we should deprecate AsyncSupport gradually and remove it > no > > > > earlier than in Apache Ignite 3.0. > > > > > > > > On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 9:31 PM, Dmitriy Setrakyan < > > > dsetrak...@apache.org> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 10:28 AM, Sergi Vladykin < > > > > sergi.vlady...@gmail.com > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > +1 For removing withAsync. It is a broken design. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sergi, do you also want to add all the async methods to the main > API > > or > > > > do > > > > > you have some other design in mind? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
