+1, I see no other reasons to keep it. 2017-04-05 13:59 GMT+03:00 Sergi Vladykin <sergi.vlady...@gmail.com>:
> +1 > > Lets drop them. > > Sergi > > 2017-04-05 13:50 GMT+03:00 Dmitriy Govorukhin < > dmitriy.govoruk...@gmail.com> > : > > > Hi guys, i implemented proxy for IgniteCache in hibernate integration, > this > > proxy transformate cacheKey to our key wrapper, leaves only required > > field. I think we can remove identity resolve, it should not broke > > integration with hibernate. Any objections? > > > > On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 11:07 PM, Valentin Kulichenko < > > valentin.kuliche...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > I'm not saying there is no alternative solution. But let's implement it > > and > > > prove that it works first, and remove resolvers only after that. > > > > > > -Val > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 12:18 PM, Sergi Vladykin < > > sergi.vlady...@gmail.com > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Guys, nothing is impossible if you know a bit about reflection in > Java > > :) > > > > > > > > We had a look at the CacheKey class and it is easily replaceable. > > > > > > > > Sergi > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2017-03-29 21:49 GMT+03:00 Dmitriy Setrakyan <dsetrak...@apache.org > >: > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 11:43 AM, Valentin Kulichenko < > > > > > valentin.kuliche...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > "Hibernate key" is the CacheKey class I was referring to. It's > > > provided > > > > > by > > > > > > Hibernate, not by user and not by us. So I'm not sure it's > possible > > > to > > > > > > replace it. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If it is impossible to replace or get rid of the Hibernate key, is > > this > > > > > discussion valid at all? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
