Mailing-List: contact dev-help@ignite.incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@ignite.incubator.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of sboikov@gridgain.com
 designates 74.125.82.181 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: 
 <CA+0=VoW3E_fRf48j+YjAs986nsEeAKA9GTr9-fqMPbgJkAZcXA@mail.gmail.com>
References: 
 <CA+0=VoW3E_fRf48j+YjAs986nsEeAKA9GTr9-fqMPbgJkAZcXA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2015 11:35:45 +0300
Message-ID: 
 <CAFx+i-ZoaS15ODW+V7KPNd1oBqSP9fbSHNcaRHb1p1cCMm80iQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Cache.invoke(...) vs GridCache.transform() methods
From: Semyon Boikov <sboikov@gridgain.com>
To: dev@ignite.incubator.apache.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e01493b405f4bd8050cfd35fa

--089e01493b405f4bd8050cfd35fa
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

Currrent implementation of Cache.invoke is slightly changed implementation
of transform(), so Cache.invoke supports transactions.

On Sun, Jan 18, 2015 at 3:49 AM, Dmitriy Setrakyan <dsetrakyan@apache.org>
wrote:

> I had a discussion with Alexey G. today and it turns out that we may have
> missed an important use case that was available with
> GridCache.transform(...) method (which was removed) and is no longer
> supported with Cache.invoke(...).
>
> The difference is that Cache.invoke(EntryProcessor, ...) does everything
> GridCache.transform(...) could do, except transactions.
> GridCache.transform(...) methods, however, can be invoked within
> transactions.
>
> Is it possible to support transactions with Cache.invoke(EntryProcessor,
> ...) methods?
>
> Or should we bring the transform(..) methods back? If yes, then they should
> look like this:
> ----
> <T> T transform(K, IgniteClosure<T, MutableEntry<K, V>)
> <T> T transformAll(Collection<K>, IgniteClosure<T, MutableEntry<K, V>>)
> ----
>
> Thoughts? (especially Alexey G, and Semyon, since you were working on this
> feature)
>
> D.
>

--089e01493b405f4bd8050cfd35fa--