AFAICU there is no reason to implement the Serializable IF, since keys are not serialized (I could be wrong though) The switch from string to object looks apparently simple, I haven't experienced any issues until now (every test run smoothly) . I'm going to attach a patch on DIRECTMEMORY-43 [1], please let me know WDYT.
[1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DIRECTMEMORY-43 Twitter :http://www.twitter.com/m_cucchiara G+ :https://plus.google.com/107903711540963855921 Linkedin :http://www.linkedin.com/in/mauriziocucchiara Maurizio Cucchiara On 15 December 2011 15:28, Raffaele P. Guidi <[email protected]> wrote: > Sure it would be a good thing, of course keeping the most frequent use case > as simple as possibile. Also remember that one of the things that allows > DirectMemory to perform well is protostuff - that is an efficient and > unobtrusive way to work around serialization. > > Ciao, > R > Il giorno 15/dic/2011 13:56, "Tommaso Teofili" <[email protected]> > ha scritto: > >> Hi all, >> >> while working on one of the examples I found myself wondering why keys in >> Cache have to be Strings. >> Generally a cache should also be able to use objects of whatever nature as >> keys, so we could use the same serialization mechanism used for values or, >> at least, define keys to be implementing the java.io.Serializable >> interface. >> What do you think? >> >> Tommaso >>
