Courtney,
Ignite 3 uses CompletableFuture.
Yes, it has thenApplyAsync and other methods which accept an Executor,
but we can't force user code to use those methods and not thenApply.
Thanks for describing your use case with custom thread pools,
we'll figure out how to support that in 3.x
On Fr
Alexander,
> it is not expected that a user may want to specify their own custom
executor
That would be nice, but I'm not sure if this fits into Ignite 3
configuration approach.
I'd like to hear more opinions on this.
On Fri, Aug 20, 2021 at 8:10 AM Courtney Robinson
wrote:
> Pavel I would rea
Pavel I would really welcome this - when we first started with Ignite we
were constantly getting the Ignite threads blocked because we'd perform
other work on it.
I don't know about the configuration part however because this isn't a
static thing I'd argue.
Is Ignite 3 still using its own types or
Pavel, thanks for the response. Do I understand correctly that it is not
expected that a user may want to specify their own custom executor?
On Thu, Aug 19, 2021 at 6:55 PM Pavel Tupitsyn wrote:
> Hi Alexander,
>
> To be honest, I'm not sure yet - just getting to know this new
> configuration me
Hi Alexander,
To be honest, I'm not sure yet - just getting to know this new
configuration mechanism and format.
Since we can't use a property of type Executor, we'll have to provide
predefined values.
It can either be "bool executeAsyncContinuationsDirectly": false (default)
=> commonPool, true
Hi, Pavel!
Can you please provide an example (e.g. HOCON snippet) of how this
configuration is going to look like in Ignite 3? Or how is this property
going to be set?
On Thu, Aug 19, 2021 at 6:00 PM Pavel Tupitsyn wrote:
> Igniters,
>
> I propose to add a configurable async continuation execu
