Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Revamped InvocationPolicy #149

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Feb 8, 2018
Merged

Revamped InvocationPolicy #149

merged 1 commit into from
Feb 8, 2018

Conversation

KarelCemus
Copy link
Owner

  • dropped implicit InvocationPolicy from Scala version of the API
  • replaced by the instance configuration through the config file
  • works also with JavaRedis

Relates to #147

- introduced Eager and Lazy invocation policy to JavaRedis
@KarelCemus
Copy link
Owner Author

@tzimisce012 Could you review the changelog and the reference.conf if it would resolve the invocation policy issue? It works also with JavaRedis but it isn't configured per method invocation as it used to be but it is configured per cache instance instead.

@tzimisce012
Copy link

I'll do it tomorrow

@hparkerfly
Copy link

Hi Karel, regarding this:

  # note: this is global definition, can be locally overriden for each
  # cache instance. To do so, redefine this property
  # under 'play.cache.redis.instances.instance-name.this-property'.

I would like to ask how could we create several redis instances in a play project.

@KarelCemus
Copy link
Owner Author

KarelCemus commented Feb 7, 2018

Hi @hparkerfly, thanks for your question.

Please, do not contribute the offtopic questions to the issues and PR, either open a new ticket or email me.

Regarding your question, there is a sample project, which uses multiple named caches, i.e., multiple instances. Here, you can see the configuration. Notice the recovery: custom, this is the example how you override the global configuration.

@hparkerfly
Copy link

Thanks @KarelCemus!

@tzimisce012
Copy link

Everything works! I didn't know how to configure cache instances but I just read the sample project that you have. Thanks :)

@KarelCemus
Copy link
Owner Author

@tzimisce012 Great. Would it at least partially solve the issue you opened? #147

@tzimisce012
Copy link

Yes, indeed :)

@KarelCemus KarelCemus merged commit 427889d into master Feb 8, 2018
@KarelCemus KarelCemus deleted the invocationPolicy branch February 8, 2018 10:36
@KarelCemus KarelCemus added this to the 2.1.0 milestone Mar 5, 2018
KarelCemus added a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 2, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

3 participants