>> We can, but the users that want to use both TO transactional caches and non >> transactional caches on the same transport - a pretty common scenario IMO - >> would have to add the seqeuncer to the jgroups configuration by hand. > > > Why not have 2 separate channels, but both residing on the same shared > transport. I think Infinispan is injected a shared transport anyway, but > AS, so this could be reused... > > Not sure on the details though, you'd have to talk to Paul for clarification
I'm not taking about 2 different caches on different CacheManagers here (this would support two transports) but two caches (one TO tx and the other non-transactional) on the same CacheManager: in this situation they share the same channel instance. >> As the seqeuncer doesn't harm performance, why not have it there by > default? > > Because this suggests total order when looking at the config. A user > looking at the config, doesn't know that we're secretly bypassing SEQUENCER. We already do that with bundling, i.e. secretly not-bundle the sync messages even though bundling is enabled in the configs by default. _______________________________________________ infinispan-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev
