|
From: <bst...@jb...> - 2006-06-29 21:29:35
|
To think through the kludgy idea a bit (mostly to save others doing it).... In general, the scope of pojo sharing needs to match up with a data structure that is meant to be "owned" by a single cache. Otherwise if a POJO is shared between two different owners, the owners will keep gravitating it back and forth. So, for example, sharing a POJO within a session is fine; sharing across sessions is not. If a POJO is shared across data owners, then it gets replicated globally, not w/ BR. Thus the owners no longer need to fight over it. Problems: 1) How do you know the POJO is shared across data owners. The cache doesn't know what the boundaries are of the data structure that is meant to be owned by one owner. 2) How do you ensure that all replication associated with a POJO's object graph is done globally, partic. if the changes occur as part of a tx that involves nodes that are not replicated globally? YIKES!! Too kludgy. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=3954516#3954516 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=3954516 |