Return-Path: X-Original-To: archive-asf-public-internal@cust-asf2.ponee.io Delivered-To: archive-asf-public-internal@cust-asf2.ponee.io Received: from cust-asf.ponee.io (cust-asf.ponee.io [163.172.22.183]) by cust-asf2.ponee.io (Postfix) with ESMTP id 65B46200CD8 for ; Wed, 2 Aug 2017 22:46:13 +0200 (CEST) Received: by cust-asf.ponee.io (Postfix) id 63B3A16A4C7; Wed, 2 Aug 2017 20:46:13 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: archive-asf-public@cust-asf.ponee.io Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by cust-asf.ponee.io (Postfix) with SMTP id A853E16A4C2 for ; Wed, 2 Aug 2017 22:46:12 +0200 (CEST) Received: (qmail 59863 invoked by uid 500); 2 Aug 2017 20:46:11 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@reef.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@reef.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@reef.apache.org Received: (qmail 59851 invoked by uid 99); 2 Aug 2017 20:46:11 -0000 Received: from pnap-us-west-generic-nat.apache.org (HELO spamd4-us-west.apache.org) (209.188.14.142) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 02 Aug 2017 20:46:11 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by spamd4-us-west.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at spamd4-us-west.apache.org) with ESMTP id E3ABFC0221 for ; Wed, 2 Aug 2017 20:46:10 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at spamd4-us-west.apache.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 1.879 X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.879 tagged_above=-999 required=6.31 tests=[DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=2, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=disabled Authentication-Results: spamd4-us-west.apache.org (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mx1-lw-us.apache.org ([10.40.0.8]) by localhost (spamd4-us-west.apache.org [10.40.0.11]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id V4LctpXf5xtl for ; Wed, 2 Aug 2017 20:46:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-oi0-f53.google.com (mail-oi0-f53.google.com [209.85.218.53]) by mx1-lw-us.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at mx1-lw-us.apache.org) with ESMTPS id 651265FB96 for ; Wed, 2 Aug 2017 20:46:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-oi0-f53.google.com with SMTP id g131so55667599oic.3 for ; Wed, 02 Aug 2017 13:46:09 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=Ynn2dAp47o9IZZEjcdCN8Zky5VtxMjPSOsYKYOU2ufs=; b=N++YoCl0GnmZLHRE7oL6cX0VIxsdMCPkfqsp0xxmAotoZx8PnjH/O0OlEXUBVq6TV6 TakXcYK7pXJnHr4toW8HSmF7ukFM01Cz5lMESKYQe5ioBhMHr8QnqLtckkhougEam6yT Xo+27GtHOblPcH63remaWZXX4SgxGIPuOEKR200txYxY7BJec/XchDysfvaf2IMU3lIa CrVNVPDSxmUDdADtmbTkvP9dJbMT22ZZ9z4WtsAThDuq17Uqhwe3+1IwaPQWcOGhqenB JNGmPrY7dNga1zdeOb/3C0LpILoESJecZDwG8HbRN1pt1zD7Pqy3kLQUBz9IFMgRKmCZ lDhw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=Ynn2dAp47o9IZZEjcdCN8Zky5VtxMjPSOsYKYOU2ufs=; b=EtOw1OKqU+DJ/MJThGHLHJMVSr+6A2TMTgNnilMcL9ACqvby1k3JUmp5gub7SrCtS+ l/Hw4O7Z69nEMXsh2BN3aU69UwxLL5mL3tu1t4uGlCutlzKyqq2sQ6fkgLEbg8UM1A98 AgAz/PTqz4JjuV/upXM/nFn5afV1O7NDgXTHJvWbpe4G+4Wzrv4HYpqP9X5q0pJmO/7q g81CChLRzLhqDYZ+9HSxygoJJ2om86ON9uXvg2LkTBSE8YzF1wcObNatScYnRLuz2ZTW R1M+aVIbu/AjPqM8IUVWKhM+yEJAiIkn8qx2QHlkwJiBfO1G8tnXGGjH2gSvOvdB+jEh aPXw== X-Gm-Message-State: AIVw11385sAn/X5yXypgj5WXpHb1hhsI18Q9jZov0ekFloK87QiNKh5s PrFzDTz+8GcU3QlVIBtPxYRo2RYs6fIu X-Received: by 10.202.1.80 with SMTP id 77mr25094987oib.180.1501706762765; Wed, 02 Aug 2017 13:46:02 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.182.28.106 with HTTP; Wed, 2 Aug 2017 13:46:02 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <826133AD-B73A-4AF9-8D87-810AB8B8C194@gmail.com> References: <826133AD-B73A-4AF9-8D87-810AB8B8C194@gmail.com> From: Rogan Carr Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2017 13:46:02 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Discussion: [REEF-1849] Fix CoreCLR incompatibilities in REEF Network To: dev@reef.apache.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a1137d4ce26cd5f0555cb5a5a" archived-at: Wed, 02 Aug 2017 20:46:13 -0000 --001a1137d4ce26cd5f0555cb5a5a Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Hi Saikat, Definitely a good option if we want to go the forked implementation route. Can you point me to the PR? Best, Rogan On Wed, Aug 2, 2017 at 1:40 PM, Saikat Kanjilal wrote: > Rogan, > A while ago I had written an implementation of custom implementation of > namedCache for .ney coreto solve compatibility issues, any interest in > reusing that for this? > > I can try to dig up the code if there's interest, I believe it was > actually code reviewed. > > Regards > > Sent from my iPhone > > > On Aug 2, 2017, at 4:05 PM, Rogan Carr wrote: > > > > Hi All, > > > > Org.Apache.REEF.Network has one main .NET Core incompatibility: It uses > > System.Runtime.Caching for its memory cache. > > > > I drafted a solution in PR-1349 [1], and I'd like feedback before I > > continue on with this. > > > > The problem with this solution is that it requires > > - Changes to the NameCacheConfiguration > > i.e. Changes to a public interface > > - Removal of (unused) internal functions in NameCache. > > > > One option to make transitioning less abrupt would be to leave NameCache > in > > place and introduce a separate, .NET Core Compatible implementation. We > > could then use compile-time flags (i.e `DOTNET_BUILD) to make the .NET > > compliant implementation the default in the Core build and deprecate the > > non-core implementation. > > > > Thoughts? > > > > Best, > > Rogan > > > > [1] https://github.com/apache/reef/pull/1349 > --001a1137d4ce26cd5f0555cb5a5a--