Does anyone actually do this in practice? If so, yikes! Even if the List is immutable, the elements may not be, so using a List as a key starts to open 1 up to a lot of problems.
As others have pointed out in SO and other channels, information should not be kept in the key. It is perfect fine to have a "Composite" Key, but then define a CompositeKey class type with properly implemented equals(:Object) and hashCode():int methods. For the most part, Keys should really only ever be simple Scalar values (e.g. Long, String, etc). -j On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 2:25 PM, Jason Huynh <jhu...@pivotal.io> wrote: > I started work on the following plan: > - deprecate current "ALL_KEYS" and List passing behavior in > registerInterest > () > - add registerInterestForAllKeys(); > - add registerInterest(T... keys) > - add registerInterest(Iterable<T>keys) > > I might be missing something here but: > With the addition of registerInterest(Iterable<T> keys), I think we would > not be able to register interest a List as the key itself. A list would be > iterated over due to the addition of registerInterest(Iterable<T> keys). A > list in a list would be passed into registerInterest and again be iterated > over. I could change the newly created registerInterest call and > explicitly name it something else or are we ok with Iterables not being > able to be registered as individual keys. > > > > > > On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 9:05 AM Kirk Lund <kl...@apache.org> wrote: > > > John's approach looks best for when you need to specify keys. > > > > For ALL_KEYS, what about an API that doesn't require a token or all keys: > > > > public void registerInterestForAllKeys(); > > > > On Fri, Nov 17, 2017 at 1:24 PM, Jason Huynh <jhu...@pivotal.io> wrote: > > > > > Thanks John for the clarification! > > > > > > On Fri, Nov 17, 2017 at 1:12 PM John Blum <jb...@pivotal.io> wrote: > > > > > > > This... > > > > > > > > > The Iterable version would handle any collection type by having the > > > user > > > > pass > > > > in the iterator for the collection. > > > > > > > > Is not correct. > > > > > > > > The Collection<E> interface itself "extends" the > java.lang.Iterable<E> > > > > interface (see here... > > > > https://docs.oracle.com/javase/8/docs/api/java/util/Collection.html > > > under > > > > "*All > > > > Superinterfaces*"). > > > > > > > > Therefore a user can simply to this... > > > > > > > > *List*<KeyType> keys = ... > > > > > > > > region.registerInterest(keys); *// calls the > > > > Region.registerInterest(:Iterable<T>) method.* > > > > > > > > Alternatively, this would also be allowed... > > > > > > > > *Set*<KeyType> keys = ... > > > > > > > > region.registerInterest(keys); > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Nov 17, 2017 at 11:44 AM, Jason Huynh <jhu...@pivotal.io> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Current idea is to: > > > > > - deprecate current "ALL_KEYS" and List passing behavior in > > > > > registerInterest() > > > > > - add registerInterestAllKeys(); > > > > > - add registerInterest(T... keys) and registerInterest(Iterable<T> > > > keys) > > > > > and > > > > > not have one specifically for List or specific collections. > > > > > > > > > > The Iterable version would handle any collection type by having the > > > user > > > > > pass in the iterator for the collection. > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Nov 17, 2017 at 11:32 AM Jacob Barrett < > jbarr...@pivotal.io> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > I am failing to see where registerInterest(List<T> keys) is an > > issue > > > > for > > > > > > the key type in the region. If our region is Region<String> then > I > > > > would > > > > > > expect registerInterest(List<String>). If the keys are unknown > or a > > > mix > > > > > > then you should have Region<Object> and thus > > > > > registerInterest(List<Object). > > > > > > > > > > > > I echo John's statements on VarArgs and type erasure as well as > his > > > > > > argument for Iterable<T>. > > > > > > > > > > > > Also, List<T> does not restrict you from List indexes. The region > > > would > > > > > be > > > > > > Region<List<String>> with registerInterest<List<List<String>>(). > > > > > > > > > > > > -Jake > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Nov 17, 2017 at 10:04 AM John Blum <jb...@pivotal.io> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > Personally, I prefer the var args method (registerInterest(T... > > > > keys)) > > > > > > > myself. It is way more convenient if I only have a few keys > when > > > > > calling > > > > > > > this method then to have to add the keys to a List, especially > > for > > > > > > testing > > > > > > > purposes. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But, I typically like to pair that with a > > > > registerInterest(Iterable<T> > > > > > > > keys) method > > > > > > > as well. By having a overloaded Iterable variant, then I can > > pass > > > in > > > > > any > > > > > > > Collection type I want (which shouldn't be restricted to just > > > List). > > > > > It > > > > > > > also is a simple matter to convert any *Collection* (i.e. > *List*, > > > > > *Set*, > > > > > > > etc) to an array, which can be passed to the var args method. > By > > > > using > > > > > > > List, > > > > > > > you are implying that "order matters" since a List is a order > > > > > collection > > > > > > of > > > > > > > elements. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This ("*It might even cause problems of pushing in **multiple > > > > different > > > > > > > types.*"), regarding var args, does not even make sense. > > > Technically, > > > > > > > List<T> is no different. Java's type erasure essentially > equates > > > var > > > > > > args > > > > > > > too "Object..." (or Object[]) and the List<T> to List (or a > List > > of > > > > > > > Objects, > > > > > > > essentially like if you just did this... List<Object>) So, > while > > > the > > > > > > > compiler ensures compile-time type-safety of generics, there is > > no > > > > > > generics > > > > > > > type-safety guarantees at runtime. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Nov 17, 2017 at 9:22 AM, Jason Huynh < > jhu...@pivotal.io> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Mike, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The current support for List leads to compilation issues if > the > > > > > region > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > type constrained. However I think you are suggesting instead > > of > > > a > > > > > var > > > > > > > args > > > > > > > > method, instead provide a registerInterest(List keys) method? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So far what I am hearing requested is: > > > > > > > > deprecate current "ALL_KEYS" and List passing behavior > > > > > > > > registerInterestAllKeys(); > > > > > > > > registerInterest(List<T> keys) instead of a > > registerInterest(T... > > > > > keys) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Will anyone ever actually have a List as the key itself? The > > > > current > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > suggested changes would not allow it registering for a > specific > > > > List > > > > > > > > object. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Nov 16, 2017 at 6:50 PM Jacob Barrett < > > > jbarr...@pivotal.io > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Geode Native C++ and .NET have: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > virtual void registerKeys(const > > > > > > > > > std::vector<std::shared_ptr<CacheableKey>> & keys, > > > > > > > > > bool isDurable = false, > > > > > > > > > bool getInitialValues = false, > > > > > > > > > bool receiveValues = true) = 0; > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > virtual void unregisterKeys(const > > > > > > > > > std::vector<std::shared_ptr<CacheableKey>> & keys) = 0; > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > virtual void *registerAllKeys*(bool isDurable = false, > > > > > > > > > bool getInitialValues = > false, > > > > > > > > > bool receiveValues = true) = > > 0; > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > virtual void unregisterAllKeys() = 0; > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > virtual void registerRegex(const std::string& regex, > > > > > > > > > bool isDurable = false, > > > > > > > > > bool getInitialValues = false, > > > > > > > > > bool receiveValues = true) = > 0; > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > virtual void unregisterRegex(const char* regex) = 0; > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I dislike special values like this so yes please make it go > > > away! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -Jake > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Nov 16, 2017 at 5:20 PM Dan Smith < > dsm...@pivotal.io > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I don't really like the regex option - it implies that > your > > > > keys > > > > > > are > > > > > > > > all > > > > > > > > > > strings. Will any other regular expressions work on non > > > string > > > > > > > objects? > > > > > > > > > > registerInterestAllKeys() seems like a better option. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -Dan > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Nov 16, 2017 at 4:34 PM, Michael Stolz < > > > > > mst...@pivotal.io> > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I don't like the vararg option. > > > > > > > > > > > If i'm maintaining a list of keys i'm interested in, I > > want > > > > to > > > > > be > > > > > > > > able > > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > pass that List in. > > > > > > > > > > > Varargs is a poor substitute. It might even cause > > problems > > > of > > > > > > > pushing > > > > > > > > > in > > > > > > > > > > > multiple different types. Keys must all be of one type > > for > > > a > > > > > > given > > > > > > > > > > Region. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I'm very much in favor of deprecating the ALL_KEYS > string > > > in > > > > > > favor > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > something that is typed specially if you refer to > > ALL_KEYS. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If that works, then we don't necessarily need the > > > additional > > > > > API > > > > > > > > > > > registerInterestAllKeys(). But if ALL_KEYS can't be a > > > special > > > > > > type > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > get > > > > > > > > > > > over the compilation issues then we should go with the > > new > > > > API. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > > > Mike Stolz > > > > > > > > > > > Principal Engineer, GemFire Product Lead > > > > > > > > > > > Mobile: +1-631-835-4771 <(631)%20835-4771> > > <(631)%20835-4771> > > > > <(631)%20835-4771> <(631)%20835-4771> > > > > > > <(631)%20835-4771> > > > > > > > <(631)%20835-4771> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Nov 16, 2017 at 7:02 PM, Anilkumar Gingade < > > > > > > > > > aging...@pivotal.io> > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > +1 Deprecating ALL_KEYS option; I believe this is > added > > > > > before > > > > > > we > > > > > > > > > > > supported > > > > > > > > > > > > regex support. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Doesn't seems like a new API is needed. The regex > java > > > doc > > > > > > > clearly > > > > > > > > > > > > specifies the effect of ".*". > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > +1 for deprecating list argument; and replacing with > > new > > > > API. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -Anil. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Nov 16, 2017 at 3:36 PM, Jason Huynh < > > > > > > jhu...@pivotal.io> > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > For GEODE-3813 < > > > > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GEODE-3813 > > > > > > > > >: > > > > > > > > > > > > Region > > > > > > > > > > > > > registerInterest API usage of type parameters is > > broken > > > > > > > > > > > > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GEODE-3813> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The current API to registerInterest allows a > special > > > > string > > > > > > > token > > > > > > > > > > > > > “ALL_KEYS” to be passed in as the parameter to > > > > > > > registerInterest(T > > > > > > > > > > key). > > > > > > > > > > > > > This special token causes the registerInterest to > > > behave > > > > > > > similar > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > > > registerInterestRegex(“.*”). As the ticket states, > > if > > > > the > > > > > > > region > > > > > > > > > has > > > > > > > > > > > > been > > > > > > > > > > > > > typed to anything other than Object or String, the > > > usage > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > “ALL_KEYS” > > > > > > > > > > > > as a > > > > > > > > > > > > > parameter results in a compilation error. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Proposals: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I would like to deprecate the special string > > “ALL_KEYS” > > > > and > > > > > > > > > document > > > > > > > > > > a > > > > > > > > > > > > > workaround of using registerInterestRegex(“.*”) or > we > > > can > > > > > > add a > > > > > > > > new > > > > > > > > > > API > > > > > > > > > > > > > called registerInterestAllKeys() > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think we should also deprecate passing a List > > Object > > > of > > > > > > keys > > > > > > > > into > > > > > > > > > > > > > registerInterest. It has the same compilation > > > > restrictions > > > > > > as > > > > > > > > > > > “ALL_KEYS” > > > > > > > > > > > > > when the region is key constrained/typed. The > reason > > > why > > > > > > List > > > > > > > > > would > > > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > > > > used is to allow registering multiple keys at once. > > > > > Instead, > > > > > > > we > > > > > > > > > can > > > > > > > > > > > add > > > > > > > > > > > > a > > > > > > > > > > > > > new var arg API like registerInterest(T… keys). > This > > > > > problem > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > solution > > > > > > > > > > > > > was also documented in the ticket by the ticket > > creator > > > > > (Kirk > > > > > > > > Lund) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -Jason > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > -John > > > > > > > john.blum10101 (skype) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > -John > > > > john.blum10101 (skype) > > > > > > > > > > -- -John john.blum10101 (skype)
