BTW having thought about it more, this seems to be the only option that actually works at the API level, even if it will require some re-eng in Infinispan core.
On 16 May 2011, at 19:29, Pete Muir wrote: > > On 16 May 2011, at 19:24, Sanne Grinovero wrote: > >> 2011/5/16 Pete Muir <pm...@redhat.com>: >>> This is the "hibernate session style contract" that Jason is talking about. >>> As the CM can be shared (e.g. in JNDI), then the same Cache object can be >>> returned in multiple applications in the app server, meaning you can't >>> simply associate the CL with a Cache object when it's created. >> >> A CM could be JNDI registered, but a Cache is not registered. assuming >> same cacheManager, two different applications could do: >> >> cacheA = cm.getCache( "hibernateCache", appAClassLoader ); >> cacheB = cm.getCache( "hibernateCache", appBClassLoader ); >> >> cacheA != cacheB >> still they will delegate toe the same "hibernateCache", but being >> different only in which ClassLoader they set in their invocation >> context, which will be read by the Unmarshaller. > > AIUI you just said what I said in different language? > > > > _______________________________________________ > infinispan-dev mailing list > infinispan-dev@lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev _______________________________________________ infinispan-dev mailing list infinispan-dev@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev
