Pavel, I like the proposal, +1 from me
Best Regards, Igor On Tue, Mar 16, 2021 at 6:49 PM Pavel Tupitsyn <ptupit...@apache.org> wrote: > Alexey, > > .NET thick API delegates to Java directly. > > When you do ICache.PutAsync(): > * Future is created on Java side, .listen() is called > * TaskCompletionSource is created on .NET side, its Task is returned to the > user > * Operation completes, Future listener is called on the Java side > * Listener invokes JNI callback to .NET, where > TaskCompletionSource.SetResult is called > > Therefore, .NET user code (in ContinueWith or after await) will be executed > on the Java > thread that invokes the future listener. > > After the proposed fix, future listeners will be invoked on > ForkJoinPool#commonPool (instead of striped pool). > So .NET continuations will end up in commonPool as well, which solves the > problem for .NET automatically, no changes required. > > Does that make sense? > > On Tue, Mar 16, 2021 at 1:52 PM Alexey Kukushkin < > kukushkinale...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > Hi Pavel, > > > > Extending Java async API with additional Executor parameters looks OK to > > me. > > > > It is not clear from the IEP how you are going to do that for .NET async > > API. My understanding is in .NET we do not add any Executors. Instead, > the > > Ignite Async API should use (SynchronizationContext.Current ?? > > TaskScheduler.Current) by default and it should have exciting behavior > (use > > Ignite striped pool) if ConfigureAwait(false) was specified for the Task > > result. > > > > Is my understanding correct? > > > > > > пн, 15 мар. 2021 г. в 19:24, Pavel Tupitsyn <ptupit...@apache.org>: > > > > > Igniters, > > > > > > Please review the IEP [1] and let me know your thoughts. > > > > > > [1] > > > > > > > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/IEP-70%3A+Async+Continuation+Executor > > > > > > > > > -- > > Best regards, > > Alexey > > >
