The intention was not to protect the user from knowing where the code was executed, but rather simplify exception handling when he wants to handle different exceptions from his code (though, throwing exception on remote node is not too efficient). And the argument was that he does not *need* to know it.
As for the debugging aid, it could make sense to add the remote stack trace to suppressed exceptions, though I don't think that it will be of any use to him. R. On 08/29/2016 06:07 PM, Dan Berindei wrote: > -1, I don't think we need to protect the user from knowing that his > lambda was executed on a remote node. On the contrary, it might help > him/her with debugging. > > FWIW, I don't think the cache should ever throw the exact exception > that the lambda raised - I'd always wrap it in some kind of > CacheException. > > Cheers > Dan > _______________________________________________ > infinispan-dev mailing list > infinispan-dev@lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev -- Radim Vansa <rva...@redhat.com> JBoss Performance Team _______________________________________________ infinispan-dev mailing list infinispan-dev@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev
