On 3 February 2014 12:12, Gunnar Morling <gun...@hibernate.org> wrote: > 2014/2/3 Sanne Grinovero <sa...@hibernate.org> >> >> If you store anything in Infinispan, it should at the very least be >> Serializable. >> >> A better solution would be to provide custom Externalizers: >> https://hibernate.atlassian.net/browse/OGM-37 > > > Ah, I see. I like the Externalizer approach as I found it surprising that AK > implements Serializable as there apparently is no need for it from the > perspective of the core engine itself. >> >> >> >> On 3 February 2014 10:56, Gunnar Morling <gun...@hibernate.org> wrote: >> > Hi, >> > >> > I'm wondering why org.hibernate.ogm.grid.AssociationKey implements >> > Serializable. When is it actually serialized? >> >> When you use Infinispan in clustered mode. >> >> > >> > I'm suspecting the answer is "never", as the type of the "metadata" >> > member >> > is not serializable, so I'd expect a NotSerializableException to be >> > raised. >> >> Our problem is probably that we don't have integration tests using >> Infinispan in modes other than "Local". >> I suspect I avoided making them as they make the testsuite slower, but >> it seems you just highlighted an important reason to add them :-/ > > > Ok, I've created https://hibernate.atlassian.net/browse/OGM-434 for adding a > test for this scenario. I'm still wondering how it supposed to work given > that AssociationKey contains a non-serializable non-transient member.
That's a problem, we need to remove it. I can help making the Infinispan tests but would be nice if you could start removing the non-serializable members, or track it as a separate issue. That would help me a lat, as I fear I've got a bit out of touch with that area of OGM. >> >> > >> > If so, does anything speak against making AssociationKey not implement >> > Serializable? >> >> It's needed. Also I think it's an important "warning flag" in terms of >> design: never consider hooking references to services in such a key, >> and strive to keep it as a very simple value holder. > > > Hum, not sure whether making a type Serializable is the right way to > indicate such a matter. But of course the requirement stands as is for > Infinispan as you describe, at least unless that Externalizer-based approach > gets implemented. I guess it's a matter of habits. If I see a class declaring "Serializable" it (personally) affects my design considerations. Sanne > > Thanks for the clarification, > > --Gunnar > > >> >> >> -- Sanne >> >> > >> > Thanks, >> > >> > --Gunnar >> > _______________________________________________ >> > hibernate-dev mailing list >> > hibernate-dev@lists.jboss.org >> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev > > _______________________________________________ hibernate-dev mailing list hibernate-dev@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev
