Dmitry, your way allows to reuse existing {{Ignite.set()}} API to create
both set flavors. We can adopt it unless somebody in the community objects.
Personally, I like {{IgniteCache.asSet()}} approach proposed by Vladimir O.
more, since it emphasizes the difference between sets being created, but
this will require API extension.
2018-03-16 8:30 GMT+03:00 Dmitriy Setrakyan <dsetrak...@apache.org>:
> On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 12:24 AM, Andrey Kuznetsov <stku...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Dmitriy,
> >
> > It's technically possible to produce both kinds of sets with
> > {{Ignite.set()}} call, but this will require to one more argument
> ('small'
> > vs 'large'). Doesn't it look less inuitive than separate
> > {{IgniteCache.asSet()}} ?
> >
> > And of course, we don't want to leave existing implementation broken.
> Pavel
> > P. has prepared the fix as part of [1].
> >
> > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-5553
>
>
> Andrey, I am suggesting that we change all non-collocated sets to be based
> on IgniteCache. In this case you do not need any additional parameters.
>
> Makes sense?
>
> D.
>
--
Best regards,
Andrey Kuznetsov.
