Re: IGNITE-2693: question about setting BinaryMarshaller on a cache

[Dood]

On 3/9/2016 7:46 PM, Alexey Goncharuk wrote:

Note that withKeepBinary() is just a way to tell a cache not to deserialize
values when doing a get or running an entry processor. The concept of
binary object does not belong solely to caches - you can get an instance of
IgniteBinary interface from Ignite and use binary objects in computations,
for example.

For me there would be more confusion if each cache had a separate
marshaller. What would then happen if you put an instance of BinaryObject
to a cache with JDK marshaller? When marshaller is global, the answer is
simple - BinaryObject is either available or not :)


Alexey, thanks for the taking the time to explain the reasoning!

Re: IGNITE-2693: question about setting BinaryMarshaller on a cache

[Alexey Goncharuk]

Note that withKeepBinary() is just a way to tell a cache not to deserialize
values when doing a get or running an entry processor. The concept of
binary object does not belong solely to caches - you can get an instance of
IgniteBinary interface from Ignite and use binary objects in computations,
for example.

For me there would be more confusion if each cache had a separate
marshaller. What would then happen if you put an instance of BinaryObject
to a cache with JDK marshaller? When marshaller is global, the answer is
simple - BinaryObject is either available or not :)

Re: IGNITE-2693: question about setting BinaryMarshaller on a cache

[Dood]

On 3/9/2016 6:43 PM, Alexey Goncharuk wrote:

Hi,

The current version of test is not very clean and it works only because
withKeepBinary() is a noop. The correct version would be to use plain cache
for non-binary-object entry processor and use withKeepBinary for
binary-object entry processor. You can see that EntryProcessor creation is
encapsulated in a separate method testClosure() which is overridden in test
inheritors. The same thing should be done for the cache.


Alexey, thank you for the comment.

On a side note: you do not find it confusing that you can set a 
marshaller on a grid but you get a binary cache from another cache via 
withKeepBinary()?


Thanks!

Re: IGNITE-2693: question about setting BinaryMarshaller on a cache

[Alexey Goncharuk]

Hi,

The current version of test is not very clean and it works only because
withKeepBinary() is a noop. The correct version would be to use plain cache
for non-binary-object entry processor and use withKeepBinary for
binary-object entry processor. You can see that EntryProcessor creation is
encapsulated in a separate method testClosure() which is overridden in test
inheritors. The same thing should be done for the cache.
​

IGNITE-2693: question about setting BinaryMarshaller on a cache

[Dood]

Hello all,

I am working on IGNITE-2693 with Vlad Ozerov's help. I am somewhat of a 
Java newbie so please be gentle ;-)


I am curious about something - after reading the Javadocs and Binary 
Marshaller docs on Ignite's documentation websites, I think that the 
documentation is not very friendly or even somewhat misleading. Or maybe 
it is the design that is puzzling to me :-)


For example, we use withKeepBinary() on a cache instance to get a binary 
cache that utilizes the binary marshaller. But this is not a setting 
that is "settable" on a per cache basis - we do not allow for a 
per-cache method to set a desired marshaller, this seems to be reserved 
for the IgniteConfiguration() interface/implementation(s) 
setMarshaller() method and is a grid-wide setting.


The background to this is that I have "fixed" the withKeepBinary() 
interface to throw an exception if the marshaller used is not binary 
(the ticket explains the reason why we want this). Apparently we 
(silently?) assume a binary marshaller everywhere but in one of the 
unrelated tests in the test suite for some reason an optimized 
marshaller is used and as a result of this (with my new change) these 
tests are failing [1]. I am trying to fix this but in the process I 
realized that you cannot set the marshaller through a 
CacheConfiguration() method (no such thing exists), this has to be done 
at a higher level (the IgniteConfiguration). However, the whole test is 
written to inherit a grid configuration with an optimized marshaller (is 
what it looks like to me)


Am I just horribly confused and missing something very obvious? Thanks!

[1] 
org.apache.ignite.internal.processors.cache.GridCacheOffHeapTieredEvictionAbstractSelfTest