I think that the replacement of serialized instance makes sense to me
for Java part.
But how it should work for .NET client?
On Tue, Aug 14, 2018 at 4:07 PM Dmitriy Setrakyan <dsetrak...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Aug 14, 2018 at 6:10 AM, Nikita Amelchev <nsamelc...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Hello, Igniters.
> >
> > I am working on task [1] that would replace serialized service's instance
> > by service's class name and properties map in {ServiceConfiguration}.
> >
> > The task describes that we should use
> > {String className} + {Map<String, Object> properties} instead {Service
> > srvc}.
> >
> > I'd like to clarify the following questions:
> >
> > 1. What about public methods?
> > I suggest to mark them as deprecated and use class name of provided
> > instance.
> > Also to add deploying methods with new parameters:
> >
> > @Deprecated
> > public IgniteInternalFuture<?> deployNodeSingleton(ClusterGroup prj,
> > String
> > name, Service svc)
> >
> > public IgniteInternalFuture<?> deployNodeSingleton(ClusterGroup prj,
> > String
> > name, String srvcClsName, Map<String, Object> prop)
> >
>
> I think this makes sense, but I would like other committers to confirm.
> Perhaps Vladimir Ozerov should comment here.
>
>
> > 2. Is {Map<String, Object> properties} parameter mandatory when deploying a
> > service?
> > Is it make sense to add deploying methods without it? For example:
> >
> > public IgniteInternalFuture<?> deployNodeSingleton(ClusterGroup prj,
> > String
> > name, String srvcClsName)
> >
> > public IgniteInternalFuture<?> deployNodeSingleton(ClusterGroup prj,
> > String
> > name, String srvcClsName, Map<String, Object> prop)
> >
>
> I would always ask the user to pass the property map, but would allow it to
> be null.
>
> D.
--
Best Regards, Vyacheslav D.
