Re: [infinispan-dev] Separate ExecutorService for map/reduce tasks?

2013-01-28 Thread Manik Surtani
Did you create a JIRA for this, BTW? On 5 Dec 2012, at 08:36, Tristan Tarrant ttarr...@redhat.com wrote: In 6.0 I would really like to go away from the current executor configuration (e.g. a specific element for every executor) and allow the creation of named executors (this is how the AS

Re: [infinispan-dev] Separate ExecutorService for map/reduce tasks?

2012-12-06 Thread Galder Zamarreño
On Dec 5, 2012, at 6:56 PM, Mircea Markus mmar...@redhat.com wrote: On 5 Dec 2012, at 15:53, Tristan Tarrant wrote: GlobalConfigurationBuilder global = new GlobalConfigurationBuilder(); global .addExecutor().name(blah); .addScheduledExecutor().name(sched); Configuration

Re: [infinispan-dev] Separate ExecutorService for map/reduce tasks?

2012-12-06 Thread Vladimir Blagojevic
On 12-12-05 10:53 AM, Tristan Tarrant wrote: Yes. Ideally I would like to have: GlobalConfigurationBuilder global = new GlobalConfigurationBuilder(); global .addExecutor().name(blah); .addScheduledExecutor().name(sched); Configuration config = new Configuration(); config

Re: [infinispan-dev] Separate ExecutorService for map/reduce tasks?

2012-12-05 Thread Tristan Tarrant
In 6.0 I would really like to go away from the current executor configuration (e.g. a specific element for every executor) and allow the creation of named executors (this is how the AS configuration works). Tristan On 11/27/2012 09:07 PM, Vladimir Blagojevic wrote: Hi, Although

Re: [infinispan-dev] Separate ExecutorService for map/reduce tasks?

2012-12-05 Thread Mircea Markus
On 5 Dec 2012, at 08:36, Tristan Tarrant wrote: In 6.0 I would really like to go away from the current executor configuration (e.g. a specific element for every executor) and allow the creation of named executors (this is how the AS configuration works). So that you can refer to the same

Re: [infinispan-dev] Separate ExecutorService for map/reduce tasks?

2012-12-05 Thread Vladimir Blagojevic
On 12-12-05 5:07 AM, Mircea Markus wrote: On 5 Dec 2012, at 08:36, Tristan Tarrant wrote: In 6.0 I would really like to go away from the current executor configuration (e.g. a specific element for every executor) and allow the creation of named executors (this is how the AS configuration

Re: [infinispan-dev] Separate ExecutorService for map/reduce tasks?

2012-12-05 Thread Tristan Tarrant
Yes. Ideally I would like to have: GlobalConfigurationBuilder global = new GlobalConfigurationBuilder(); global .addExecutor().name(blah); .addScheduledExecutor().name(sched); Configuration config = new Configuration(); config .clustering().async().replQueueExecutor(blah)

Re: [infinispan-dev] Separate ExecutorService for map/reduce tasks?

2012-12-05 Thread Mircea Markus
On 5 Dec 2012, at 15:53, Tristan Tarrant wrote: GlobalConfigurationBuilder global = new GlobalConfigurationBuilder(); global .addExecutor().name(blah); .addScheduledExecutor().name(sched); Configuration config = new Configuration(); config

Re: [infinispan-dev] Separate ExecutorService for map/reduce tasks?

2012-12-04 Thread Galder Zamarreño
Too big change IMO for 5.2. @Vladimir, did you check with Mircea which JIRAs you could help with which have higher prio for 5.2? Cheers, On Nov 27, 2012, at 9:07 PM, Vladimir Blagojevic vblag...@redhat.com wrote: Hi, Although https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-2284 is charted for 6.0

Re: [infinispan-dev] Separate ExecutorService for map/reduce tasks?

2012-12-04 Thread Mircea Markus
On 4 Dec 2012, at 09:43, Galder Zamarreño wrote: Too big change IMO for 5.2. +1 @Vladimir, did you check with Mircea which JIRAs you could help with which have higher prio for 5.2? Mind looking at some bugs/usability features first: ISPN-2353 and ISPN-2409. You have a very good pace :-)

[infinispan-dev] Separate ExecutorService for map/reduce tasks?

2012-11-27 Thread Vladimir Blagojevic
Hi, Although https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-2284 is charted for 6.0 I would like to see if there is a possibility to finish it for 5.2. Most of the parallel execution I have done already this and last week [1]. However, this change is not limited to map/reduce package only as we might