Gianfranco, Behaviour wise it is similar. In this, data (streams) processed by map into new stream and this new stream is processed by reduce stream.
In RS, multiple such opeartions are composed. This is as per MapReduce, RS can exist alongside, by two means: 1. A new entity (reactive) in compute section. 2. ComputeTask implementation, adapting RS as per MapReduce semantics. On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 8:32 PM, Gianfranco Murador < murador.gianfra...@gmail.com> wrote: > It ' a nice feature to be included in the grid compute module , in my > opinion . But I have a question : what difference we have with ComputeTask > class in behavioral terms ? > > https://apacheignite.readme.io/docs/compute-tasks > > 2015-09-23 16:45 GMT+02:00 Lalit Kumar Jha <lalitj....@gmail.com>: > > > Summarizing this: > > > > *Goal*: All data flow/stream in system adhere to “Reactive Streams” API, > > includes data ingestion, async computation, compute result/stream > > aggregation. > > > > *Benefits*: > > > > > > - Common interface for all data transfer/exchange/processing. > > - Streaming data ingestion can compose complex stream processing in a > > standard (interoperable dropin implementation replacement) fashion, > like > > filter or aggregate streaming data, merge multiple stream etc. > > > > > > - Compose multiple async compute jobs results as streams. > > > > > > *Design*: To overcome “Cons of Exposing Reactive Stream APIs instead of > > RxJava (or other implementation)” mentioned at > > https://github.com/ReactiveX/RxJava/wiki/Reactive-Streams > > > > #1. Follow recommended approach there. > > > > > > #2. Rather than having streaming (data transfer) stream processing logic > > (filter, merge, flatMap) in Consumer, treat them as a separate concern, > and > > wrap Publisher/Consumer in concrete classes. > > > > This is discouraged by RxJava, but will keep standard and non standard > > implementation separate and will allow using multiple libraries for > > different use-cases. Rather than having this behaviour tightly coupled in > > Consumer. > > > > > > > > On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 6:29 PM, Raul Kripalani <ra...@apache.org> > wrote: > > > > > Yeah, in my original post I already pointed out that Reactive Streams > is > > a > > > proposed standard but not an implementation. > > > > > > My proposal was to go with RxJava 1.0 + the Reactive Streams adapter ( > > > https://github.com/ReactiveX/RxJavaReactiveStreams) for now, as that > > would > > > allow users to benefit from things like Hystrix whose base is RxJava > 1.0, > > > while keeping their code future-proof for when RxJava 2.0 is released > > with > > > a native RS interface. > > > > > > Thanks for chiming in. > > > > > > Raúl. > > > > > > On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 1:35 PM, akarnokd <akarn...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > I'd definitely go on a Reactive-Streams path (although I don't know > > what > > > > Apache Ignite does), however, there seems to be a small confusion > > around > > > > RS. > > > > RS is a set of 4 interfaces and practically unusable on its own. One > > > needs > > > > a > > > > library built around it such as Project Reactor, Akka Streams and > > RxJava > > > > 2.0. Such library, likely, will also slip into the API itself due to > > its > > > > usefulness. > > > > > > > > For example, the following API is inconvenient to use but is > definitely > > > > cutting-edge: > > > > > > > > Publisher<Data> getData(); > > > > > > > > but you can only subscribe to it in its plain form or wrap it with > one > > of > > > > the libraries: > > > > > > > > Observable.fromPublisher(getData()).map().filter().group()... > > > > > > > > I'm not sure about the others, but RxJava 2.0 Observable (which later > > may > > > > be > > > > renamed to Flowable) implement Publisher directly, therefore, the > > > following > > > > getData() may return an RxJava Observable and still be consumable via > > > > Reactor or Akka (after wrapping/fluent-conversion, of course): > > > > > > > > getData().to(Streams::from).dispatchOn(...) > > > > > > > > Although I'm pretty confident that RxJava 2.0 works right now, it is > > > still > > > > considered alpha and based on past experience with its gatekeepers, > it > > > may > > > > take 6-12 months until an official release comes out. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > View this message in context: > > > > > > > > > > http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/Brainstorming-about-Reactive-Streams-tp3346p3422.html > > > > Sent from the Apache Ignite Developers mailing list archive at > > > Nabble.com. > > > > > > > > > >
