Are any of the folks on this thread in/around the bay area? (I know Nabib is). We're having a clojure user-group meeting on the 12th of March - and the clojure/terracotta topic is of interest to a lot of people... It would be wonderful if someone would come and talk about the progress...
Regards, Amit. http://www.meetup.com/The-Bay-Area-Clojure-User-Group/ On Mar 1, 8:37 am, Luc Prefontaine <lprefonta...@softaddicts.ca> wrote: > We will go for a TIM. Just looked at the doc and tes that would simplify > our work a lot. > > Thank you, > > Luc > > > > > > On Sat, 2009-02-28 at 18:48 -0800, Nabib El-Rahman wrote: > > Hi guys, > > > I work for Terracotta ( on the server side ) and find this work with > > Clojure + Terracotta very exciting. Writing a TIM is definitely the > > way to go, It's a place to hide the glue until both Terracotta and > > Clojure catches up with each other. If you have any questions feel > > free to post on our forums > >http://forums.terracotta.org/forums/forums/list.page > > > If you check out our trunk version, theres also an effort to make a > > common-api which will help writing a TIM easier for you guys. > > > Good luck! > > > -Nabib > > > On Sat, Feb 28, 2009 at 12:02 PM, Luc Prefontane > > <lprefonta...@softaddicts.ca> wrote: > > > We think the same way. Our first implementation of an > > alternative to AtomicReference > > is straightforward, we will look at improving it if the need > > arises. > > > It will be easier to do so when we get stats from Terracotta > > after running some benchmarks. > > There's much to do before getting there. > > > Luc > > > On Sat, 2009-02-28 at 14:33 -0500, Paul Stadig wrote: > > > > In the Namespace case, it might be premature optimization to worry > > > about AtomicReference being replaced. If there is a way to rewrite > > > that code with, say, synchronized blocks, and it will work better > > with > > > Terracotta, I think it would be worth doing. I don't think it > > would be > > > normal usage to be updating the mappings and aliases in a > > namespace > > > 1,000 times a second. > > > > AtomicReference is also used in Atom and Agent. Those cases may > > not be > > > as straight forward. > > > > Paul > > > > On Sat, Feb 28, 2009 at 11:51 AM, Luc Prefontaine > > > <lprefonta...@softaddicts.ca> wrote: > > > > > 1) AtomicReference is used in several places. Instead of > > changing it, we > > > > think we can keep > > > > it when Clojure runs "locally" and provide an alternative when > > running in > > > > "shared" mode. > > > > > AtomicReference is optimized to be efficient in a standalone > > JVM. We would > > > > like to > > > > keep it that way. Eventually Terracotta will provide > > instrumentation on this > > > > class > > > > by default so the "shared" implementation could be thrown away > > in the near > > > > future. > > > > We see the double implementations as a transition period until > > Terracotta > > > > supports > > > > it directly. > > > > > 2) Noted > > > > > Shared versus local mode: > > > > > That's what we have in mind, getting Clojure to work in a > > "shared" mode > > > > versus a > > > > local/standalone mode. We want 0 impacts on the user code. > > Eventually we > > > > could use meta data to provide some hints that would allow us > > to fine tune > > > > shared interactions from user code. This would not impact > > "local" mode > > > > behaviours. > > > > We're not there yet but we know that this possibility exists so > > that's > > > > reassuring > > > > for the future. > > > > > Integration is pretty simple once the common code base > > integrates the > > > > necessary > > > > changes. We need a shell script, a Terracotta configuration > > that will be > > > > maintained > > > > as part of the Clojure code base and some documentation. > > > > > As of now we use a system property to toggle the modes, we will > > implement a > > > > transparent way (testing the presence of a terracotta property > > most > > > > probably). > > > > > Luc > > > -- > > > Luc Préfontaine > > > Off.:(514) 993-0320 > > Fax.:(514) 993-0325 > > > Armageddon was yesterday, today we have a real problem... > > -- > > Luc Préfontaine > > Off.:(514) 993-0320 > Fax.:(514) 993-0325 > > Armageddon was yesterday, today we have a real problem... --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
