ignite-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Igor Sapego <isap...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Thin Client lib: Python
Date Thu, 26 Jul 2018 14:39:18 GMT
Ilya,

This may affect performance in a negative way, as it requires
additional hashcode calculation on every cache operation.

Best Regards,
Igor


On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 5:02 PM Ilya Kasnacheev <ilya.kasnacheev@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Hello!
>
> I think that having both options is indeed preferable.
>
> Regards,
>
> --
> Ilya Kasnacheev
>
> 2018-07-26 16:51 GMT+03:00 Dmitry Melnichuk <
> dmitry.melnichuk@nobitlost.com>
> :
>
> > Hi, Ilya!
> >
> > I considered this option. Indeed, the code would look cleaner if only one
> > kind of identifier (preferably the human-readable name) was used. But
> there
> > can be a hypothetical situation, when the user is left with hash code
> only.
> > (For example, obtained from some other API.) It would be sad to have an
> > identifier and not be able to use it.
> >
> > Now I really think about using hash codes and names interchangeably, so
> > both
> >
> > ```
> > cache_put(conn, 'my-cache', value=1, key='a')
> > ```
> >
> > and
> >
> >
> > ```
> > cache_put(conn, my_hash_code, value=1, key='a')
> > ```
> >
> > will be allowed.
> >
> > This will be a minor complication on my side, and quite reasonable one.
> >
> >
> > On 07/26/2018 10:44 PM, Ilya Kasnacheev wrote:
> >
> >> Hello!
> >>
> >> Why not use cache name as string here, instead of cache_id()?
> >>
> >> cache_put(conn, 'my-cache', value=1, key='a')
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >>
> >>
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message