There are agents, atoms, vars, seqs, and lisp macros all of which may make Clojure a more appealing alternative to Java for use with Terracotta.
My goal was to get Clojure working with Terracotta, period. Most of the work I did was actually focused on vars so that you could define a function and have it available throughout the cluster, but eventually I did want to see the STM working in Terracotta. Performance doesn't always matter all the time for every problem, but its good to keep in mind what you are saying when making decisions where performance does matter. On Jul 20, 2010 8:46 PM, "peter veentjer" <alarmnum...@gmail.com> wrote: Hi Chas, if you want to 'spawn' independent processes over different machines, terracotta could be an option. But as soon as these processes are going to share state, it gets a lot more complicated since a scalar clock MVCC based stm is not going to be scalable over different machines. Afaik the focus of Paul was on distributing the Clojure STM using terracotta. On Jul 20, 5:47 am, Chas Emerick <cemer...@snowtide.com> wrote: > I can't respond to that, but pres... > >>> is athttp://github.com/pjstadig/tim-clojure-1.0.0andittries to be > >>> a Clojure > >>> 1.0.0 compatible TIM, which shows how its a bit out-of-date. > > >>> I am very... -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en
