Hardy, How would it work for say a DirectoryProvider in Hibernate search (which is a plugin of HSearch which itself is a plugin of Core in a way - listener).
Remember we have the hibernate.search.default.[customproperty] category and the hibernate.search.[indexname].[customproperty] category. What would the the impl of PropertyConsumer#collectConsumedProperties like for Hibernate Search? On 1 févr. 2010, at 16:28, Hardy Ferentschik wrote: > The pull approach via an additional PropertyConsumer interface works for me. > It seems to be a good trade-off. Least invasive while still getting some order > into the properties. > > --Hardy > > > On Mon, 01 Feb 2010 12:14:02 -0300, Steve Ebersole <st...@hibernate.org> > wrote: > >> On Mon, 2010-02-01 at 09:49 +0100, Emmanuel Bernard wrote: >>> Also "plugins" can make use of the general availability of properties. >>> For example Hibernate Search reads everything under hibernate.search (and >>> it's not a limited set of property names). Likewise, HSearch extensions can >>> use whatever property name they want to configure say the custom backend or >>> the directory providers (either custom or even one of the system >>> properties). >> >> The main use case I was keeping in mind along the way was caching. I know >> in the JBC and Infinispan integrations they added the ability to read a lot >> of config information from our properties. >> >> As long as it is something configured by the Configuration -> >> Settings/SessionFactory process or the something is known to >> SessionFactory at the end of its init it is workable. For example, I >> imagine Validator would be easy to tie in here because of the listeners; >> they are known to the SessionFactory. Not so sure about Search, it >> registers listeners too so maybe its ok. >> >> The first question is whether we want a push or pull (from perspective >> of the things being configured) model here. For example, would the >> ConnectionProvider tell SessionFactory about the properties it consumed >> (push)? Or would the SessionFactory ask the ConnectionProvider for that >> info (pull)? >> >> The pull approach has the advantage of being the least trade-off . We >> could add an optional interface "PropertyConsumer" that things can >> choose to implement. If they do, the method would be something like >> "collectConsumedProperties(Map copy)"; they would put all the property >> keys/values into the given map. >> >> Another potential "pull" approach is to not pass around j.u.Properties >> into these things to configure themselves, but to instead wrap that in a >> class that journals the key/values as they are requested. That is a bit >> more invasive though as it would mean changing quite a few contracts, >> some of which are implemented by classes outside our control. >> >> In the "push" strategy, the things configuring themselves somehow push >> which properties (key/value) they are consuming. Much like the second >> pull-approach, this is pretty invasive because we would need to pass in >> the mechanism for these "configurables" to report back which properties >> they are consuming. Not to mention its tedious. >> >> Long term I like the second pull approach. However, I personally think >> it is too disruptive in the short term and that we should use the first >> pull approach for now. >> >> Thoughts? >> > _______________________________________________ hibernate-dev mailing list hibernate-dev@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev
