incubator-directmemory-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Raffaele P. Guidi" <raffaele.p.gu...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Distributed DirectMemory
Date Mon, 07 Nov 2011 23:26:28 GMT
Coupling is a bad thing, of course. What about adapting/forking JCS lateral
cache code? Is there an ASF policy about that?

On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 12:13 AM, Ioannis Canellos <iocanel@gmail.com> wrote:

> Is don't see any JCS release the last two years. Is this a sign of maturity
> or inactivity?
>
> I like the idea of providing direct memory plugin for other projects (e.g
> as we did we karaf) but I am not sure if I like the idea of coupling.
>
>
> On Monday, November 7, 2011, Raffaele P. Guidi <raffaele.p.guidi@gmail.com
> >
> wrote:
> > This is of course an interesting option - well, we could also leverage
> > indexed disk cache as L3 - and steal indexing and recycling techniques.
> > Merging efforts with JCS could bring to the most complete java cache
> > solution in the OS world. I don't have any idea about performance of JCS
> > and its lateral cache, but it's probably a bit outdated and could benefit
> > from a technology refresh (NIO, fast serialization - see Apache Avro as
> an
> > example)
> >
> > On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 10:30 PM, Mir Tanvir Hossain <
> > mir.tanvir.hossain@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> JCS already has distributed caching option. So, instead of
> re-implementing
> >> the distributed cache, we can integrate tightly with JCS, and become its
> >> off-heap plugin. So, JCS could be the L1 cache, and DirectMemory could
> be
> >> the L2 cache. Just an idea.
> >>
> >> -Mir
> >>
> >> On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 12:30 PM, Ioannis Canellos <iocanel@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> > I was looking at the jira issues and DIRECTMEMORY-13 - Make some
> >> > investigation about going
> >> > distributed<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DIRECTMEMORY-13>
> >> > caught
> >> > my attention.
> >> >
> >> > I've read about some of the initial thoughts about reusing features of
> >> > existing Caches (Hazelcast or Terracotta) but I don't like this idea
> so
> >> > much.
> >> > We could reuse some of the ides that existing projects use, but I
> think
> >> > that we should either build it on our own, or use a solution not
> coupled
> >> to
> >> > an existing cache.
> >> >
> >> > So what are your thought about making direct memory distributed?
> >> > Any thoughts about the consistency model, discovery etc?
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > *Ioannis Canellos*
> >> > *
> >> > FuseSource <http://fusesource.com>
> >> >
> >> > **
> >> > Blog: http://iocanel.blogspot.com
> >> > **
> >> > Apache Karaf <http://karaf.apache.org/> Committer & PMC
> >> > Apache Camel <http://camel.apache.org/> Committer
> >> > Apache ServiceMix <http://servicemix.apache.org/>  Committer
> >> > Apache Gora <http://incubator.apache.org/gora/> Committer
> >> > Apache DirectMemory <http://incubator.apache.org/directmemory/>
> >> Committer
> >> > *
> >> >
> >>
> >
>
> --
> *Ioannis Canellos*
> *
> FuseSource <http://fusesource.com>
>
> **
> Blog: http://iocanel.blogspot.com
> **
> Apache Karaf <http://karaf.apache.org/> Committer & PMC
> Apache Camel <http://camel.apache.org/> Committer
> Apache ServiceMix <http://servicemix.apache.org/>  Committer
> Apache Gora <http://incubator.apache.org/gora/> Committer
> Apache DirectMemory <http://incubator.apache.org/directmemory/> Committer
> *
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message