On Fri, Dec 29, 2017 at 2:28 AM, Stanislav Lukyanov <[email protected]> wrote:
> > I would surround such replacements with "_", e.g. > "myCacheName_somesymbol_". > Looks nice, will do. > > > Here I am confused. I think the cache names should be case insensitive at > > all times. I seriously doubt enforcing this rule would cause problems. If > > we enforce this rule at cache creation time, then we would not have to > add > > a hashcode at the end. > I think I would still keep the hashcode. E.g. I’m now also truncating > names longer than 255 chars, and the truncated names could be equal. There > could be more edge cases, and adding an imprint of the identity might help > to avoid them. The names are readable enough with the hashes, but scary > enough for users not to mess with them manually – I guess that’s a good > thing :) Making cache names always case-insensitive sounds good, but I’d separate it > to another JIRA issue (it has larger compatibility impact, it affects a > different part of the code base, etc). Is it OK? > Well, having to support multiple cache name formats going forward will be difficult. I would rather we finalize on it right now. My preference would be to limit to 255 characters right now and make cache names case insensitive. I doubt such change would affect many users, but it would definitely make things cleaner. Would be nice to here what others in the community think. Vladimir O., Alexey G.? D.
