Hmmmm, not sure about adding a method to IC, cos that would lead to code like
this which is very verbose:
cache.getAdvancedCache().getInvocationContextContainer().getInvocationContext().setScope("X")
As a user, I'd prefer something like:
cache.getAdvancedCache().withScope("X")
However, this would only be used to attach a particular scope. I envision a
global, cache manager level configuration such as that marks all caches in that
cache manager to be scoped by the cache name. That way, HTTP session repl code
would need no changing at all and with a single flag, they could make each
individual cache to act in its own scope. The code above would allow two caches
to share the same scope for those situations where we want sequential calls for
the two caches, i.e.:
cache1.getAdvancedCache().withScope("X")
cache1.put()
cache2.getAdvancedCache().withScope("X")
cache2.put()
By the way, I don't understand your comment of "refine this scope by adding
GlobalTransaction and so on". If we take the cache1/cache2 example and imagine
that these two would be called within a transaction, I'd imagine that the
transaction itself would act as a scope and so would not need for a particular
scope definition? i.e.
tx.begin()
cache1.put()
cache2.put()
tx.commit()
At first glance, 5.0 would be the perfect target for this, but we'd need to
take in account for any requirements coming from Paul since HTTP session repl
could greatly benefit from it.
As far as 2LC is concerned, within a deployment multiple txs will be operating
on same caches so scoping could not be used. However different deployments
could benefit from deployment level scoping so that messages for different
caches can be sent in parallel. In AS environment different deployments could
share the same 2LC cache manager and so the configuration option above would
not work, but I'd need a deployment level scope that I'd use with
cache.withScope().
Cheers,
On Jan 28, 2011, at 8:54 PM, Vladimir Blagojevic wrote:
> Forgot to mention that scopes require addition of SCOPE protocol to the
> stack. So we can probably do this on 5.0 branch only.
> On 11-01-28 4:52 PM, Vladimir Blagojevic wrote:
>> Hey,
>>
>> JGroups scopes [1] have been implemented for a while now and we should
>> think about using them in Infinispan. I looked around a bit to see how
>> we can use scope and satisfy requirements Manik outlined [2]. I think a
>> good idea would be to introduce scope method in InvocationContext? We
>> can start by implementing scope to return hash of cache name where
>> invocation originated and subsequently refine this scope by adding
>> GlobalTransaction and so on. Users, if they really need to scope their
>> calls could do so by attaching additional markers to InvocationContext
>> or smth similar.
>>
>> WDYT?
>>
>>
>> [1]https://issues.jboss.org/browse/JGRP-822
>> [2]https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-3
>> _______________________________________________
>> infinispan-dev mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev
>
> _______________________________________________
> infinispan-dev mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev
--
Galder Zamarreño
Sr. Software Engineer
Infinispan, JBoss Cache
_______________________________________________
infinispan-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev
