Denis, Can you suggest a use-case where identity resolver is needed (given that we agree that a key must contain only valuable fields)?
2017-04-05 22:08 GMT+03:00 Denis Magda <dma...@apache.org>: > Where do you want to remove the identity resolvers from? If it’s related > to the internals of Hibernate module then it’s fine but if you suggest > removing identity resolvers public interfaces then it might be a haste > decision. > > — > Denis > > > On Apr 5, 2017, at 7:42 AM, Alexey Goncharuk <alexey.goncha...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > +1, I see no other reasons to keep it. > > > > 2017-04-05 13:59 GMT+03:00 Sergi Vladykin <sergi.vlady...@gmail.com>: > > > >> +1 > >> > >> Lets drop them. > >> > >> Sergi > >> > >> 2017-04-05 13:50 GMT+03:00 Dmitriy Govorukhin < > >> dmitriy.govoruk...@gmail.com> > >> : > >> > >>> Hi guys, i implemented proxy for IgniteCache in hibernate integration, > >> this > >>> proxy transformate cacheKey to our key wrapper, leaves only required > >>> field. I think we can remove identity resolve, it should not broke > >>> integration with hibernate. Any objections? > >>> > >>> On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 11:07 PM, Valentin Kulichenko < > >>> valentin.kuliche...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>> > >>>> I'm not saying there is no alternative solution. But let's implement > it > >>> and > >>>> prove that it works first, and remove resolvers only after that. > >>>> > >>>> -Val > >>>> > >>>> On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 12:18 PM, Sergi Vladykin < > >>> sergi.vlady...@gmail.com > >>>>> > >>>> wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> Guys, nothing is impossible if you know a bit about reflection in > >> Java > >>> :) > >>>>> > >>>>> We had a look at the CacheKey class and it is easily replaceable. > >>>>> > >>>>> Sergi > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> 2017-03-29 21:49 GMT+03:00 Dmitriy Setrakyan <dsetrak...@apache.org > >>> : > >>>>> > >>>>>> On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 11:43 AM, Valentin Kulichenko < > >>>>>> valentin.kuliche...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> "Hibernate key" is the CacheKey class I was referring to. It's > >>>> provided > >>>>>> by > >>>>>>> Hibernate, not by user and not by us. So I'm not sure it's > >> possible > >>>> to > >>>>>>> replace it. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> If it is impossible to replace or get rid of the Hibernate key, is > >>> this > >>>>>> discussion valid at all? > >>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >>> > >> > >
