Replied in ticket. Also posting here.

Currently invokeAsync() is defined as public <T> IgniteFuture<T>

If we need EntryProcessorResult to be returned from Future then it should
be public <T> IgniteFuture<EntryProcessorResult<T>> invokeAsync(.....). I
am not sure why we have this difference in sync/async counterpart.
Probably, Vladimir Ozerov
<> or Taras
provide some info.

I also think that we will not changing the public API in 2.0. Let's leave
it as is and then fix in next major version.


2017-08-08 20:05 GMT+03:00 Александр Меньшиков <>:

> Hello, I found one small bug.
> The problem is IgniteInternalCache.invokeAsync().get() will return null if
> EntryProcessor return null. But the IgniteInternalCache.invoke() will
> return EntryProcessorResult in the same situation (with null inside). It
> can be optimization, and I guess we have to change invoke()'s result in
> that case. Or it's a bug, and we have to change the result of
> invokeAsync().
> If EntryProcessor returns not null everything is okay.
> It doesn't relate with IgniteCache.invoke*.

Reply via email to