Sorry for not being precise. What I meant be "completely" is for a single processor. Assume I want to have the following pattern:
process(...) {
if (someCondition) {
state.put(...)
context.forward(...);
} else {
context.forward(...);
}
Ie, for some record I do update the state and emit output records, for
other records I only emit output records. This work in current design.
However, if a "cached state" would be used, it would not work any more.
-Matthias
On 09/04/2016 05:58 PM, Damian Guy wrote:
> Hi Matthias,
>
> Thanks for bringing the conversation across to the thread.
>
> I think a main limitation would be, that you cannot mix the 4 patterns
>> within a single application anymore (iff you use a "caches state"). If
>> you have processor with a "cached state" this disables direct usage of
>> context.forward() completely -- if I understand the design correctly.
>> Thus, if a "cached state" is used, forwarding is only possible via state
>> updates.
>>
>>
> The above statement is not correct. Caching doesn't completely disable
> forwarding, it only disables it for Processors that are using State Stores.
> In all other cases context.forward() works as it does now.
>
> Thanks,
> Damian
>
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
