Dima, Why do you think somebody will need to override equals? Currently we do not have such an ability and AFAIK we did not have a single question regarding this. Other products, such as Hazelcast, rely solely on binary representation of a key. If this is never used, why do we need to increase the configuration complexity?
2016-10-01 5:25 GMT+03:00 Dmitriy Setrakyan <dsetrak...@apache.org>: > Alex, > > I can't post in the ticket, because my Jira login stopped working, so I > will post here. > > I only have 1 question - do we purposely not support custom equals > implementation? Seems we could simply add 2 methods to the > BinaryObjectHashCodeResolver: isUseEquals() and computeEquals(). Having > said that, I am OK with current design, we can always add equals support > later. > > Otherwise, looks good. > > D. > > On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 5:19 PM, Alexander Paschenko < > alexander.a.pasche...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > I've posted proposed example of hash code resolver interface and XML > > configuration for classless key on issue page > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-2294. > > > > 2016-09-29 20:16 GMT+03:00 Dmitriy Setrakyan <dsetrak...@apache.org>: > > > On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 9:57 AM, Denis Magda <dma...@gridgain.com> > > wrote: > > > > > >> Alex, > > >> > > >> A minor note regarding this > > >> > > >> > On Sep 29, 2016, at 8:39 AM, Alexey Goncharuk < > > >> alexey.goncha...@gmail.com> wrote: > > >> > > > >> > A set of fields participating in hashCode and equals is impossible > to > > >> > change without cluster restart. > > >> > > >> It’s unlikely that someone will change a key or at least it should be > a > > >> rare or accidental operation. In any case if this happens a user must > > >> upgrade all the keys he already has in a cache. To resolve this it’s > > >> simpler to create a new cache with updated configuration and populate > > data > > >> there. This will not require us to restart a cluster. > > >> > > > > > > We should have a check in code that would prohibit changing hashcode > > fields > > > or the hashcode resolver class within the same cache. Using a different > > > cache to store the keys with new hashcodes is always an option and does > > not > > > require anything special from our side. > > > > > > > > >> > > >> — > > >> Denis > > >
