cshannon commented on PR #2252: URL: https://github.com/apache/activemq/pull/2252#issuecomment-5097851096
So to be clear, if using the async cache we still need to wait on the future returned to complete but it might increase concurrency across different message ids (keys). We can always stick to the sync version for now as the computation for storing in the cache should be quick, I was just curious if there was any difference. The underlying cache delegates to ConcurrentHashMap which will block some operations if compute() is slow so the async version offloads to another thread. If there isn't much difference the standard sync cache is simpler. -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: [email protected] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] For further information, visit: https://activemq.apache.org/contact
