gurustron commented on PR #4763: URL: https://github.com/apache/ignite-3/pull/4763#issuecomment-2493116154
> > Maybe follow the factory pattern > ... > Certainly less confusing than the factory that reuses objects. Had some wrong assumptions about inner workings of the client. Agree on the factory approach being confusing. > Maybe we should use a different name, like `IgniteClientGroup`? Actually if we will return something which is not disposable then probably `Pool` is fine too. Also maybe create an interface `IIgniteClientGroup`/`IgniteClientPool` and rename current implementation to `RoundRobinIgniteClientGroup` or something similar? So in future if there will be a more complex approach to rotation algorithm it would be easier to swap? Alternatively this can be solved by introducing `IgniteClientPoolConfiguration.Algorithm` setting but potentially it less fluent. -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscr...@ignite.apache.org For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: us...@infra.apache.org
