danielcweeks commented on PR #12562:
URL: https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/12562#issuecomment-3049574873

   @adutra I'm not sure I fully understand the value of this change at this 
point.  We're making a breaking change that's going to take multiple releases 
to finalize, but I'm not convinced that there's real value added here.  
   
   Maybe you can add more context on how you want to use this, but if you're 
going to key off an object, you need to have that object to retrieve the value. 
 If you have the object, you can produce and identifier string for the key.  
What's the practical difference between: 
   1. `AuthSessionCache<MyAuthConfig, MyAuthSession>`, where MyAuthConfig is 
the key
   2. `new AuthSessionCache<String, MyAuthSession>`, where the String is 
`MyAuthConfig::sessionId`?
   
   If this is targeted at other implementations, they can easily hide this and 
you avoid the problems of using objects ask keys (e.g. properly implementing 
hashing/equivalence).  I don't see a lot of upsides to geneaicizing this and 
there are number of downsides.


-- 
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: issues-unsubscr...@iceberg.apache.org

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscr...@iceberg.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: issues-h...@iceberg.apache.org

Reply via email to