On Mon, Oct 3, 2016 at 5:03 AM, Alexey Goncharuk <alexey.goncha...@gmail.com > wrote:
> 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? > Agree. As I mentioned, let's proceed with the current design and see if anyone asks to override "equals" method. We can always add it later. > > 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 > > > > > >
