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

ISPN-3829 Null value read with RR can be replaced by cache loader value #2295

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

wburns
Copy link
Member

@wburns wburns commented Dec 17, 2013

  • Fixed issue where RR if found null woud still query cache loader

https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-3829

* get only if the value is null (Repeatable Read)
*/
protected boolean shouldAttemptLookup(CacheEntry e) {
return e == null || (e.isNull() || e.getValue() == null) && !e.skipRemoteGet();
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I would suggest to change the name of skipRemoteGet() to something like skipFetch(). Also, change the name of the internal flag and the setter :)

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

or skipLookup()

* Fixed issue where RR if found null woud still query cache loader
@wburns
Copy link
Member Author

wburns commented Dec 19, 2013

Changed and refactored all the references. I was hesitant since it is on an interface, but this is 7.0 so I would think it is okay. Let me know!

@wburns
Copy link
Member Author

wburns commented Dec 19, 2013

Actually this issue is a candidate to put into 6.0.2, is the change of the interface in that case okay? @mmarkus ?

@pruivo
Copy link
Member

pruivo commented Dec 19, 2013

@wburns I think it's fine for two reasons: 1) it is an internal interface and 2) I don't think we are going to have more 6.x releases. but maybe it's better to have @mmarkus confirmation :)

@mmarkus
Copy link
Contributor

mmarkus commented Dec 19, 2013

@wburns @pruivo indeed it's an internal interface so IMO we should be fine with the change.

@wburns
Copy link
Member Author

wburns commented Dec 19, 2013

Sounds good, I just wanted to confirm. I am so used to previous work that basically anyone may have extended our interfaces even internal ones, so I was always overly cautious.

@mmarkus
Copy link
Contributor

mmarkus commented Dec 19, 2013

@wburns would make sense to have an annotation stating that something is public API or not, would be easier for the clients and us to handle things that way. @tristantarrant wdyt?

@mmarkus
Copy link
Contributor

mmarkus commented Dec 19, 2013

pulling...

@mmarkus
Copy link
Contributor

mmarkus commented Dec 19, 2013

@wburns thank you!

@mmarkus mmarkus closed this Dec 19, 2013
@wburns wburns deleted the ISPN-3829 branch November 4, 2014 14:09
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
3 participants