Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Client-side caching by hashing command arguments #3700
Client-side caching by hashing command arguments #3700
Changes from 10 commits
f66697f
322ffeb
2ef4376
9f160e2
3827e7d
e910168
0ba4d7d
e3a5900
d7720a1
d3acff2
58e2f43
dd45f5f
ef69cb5
4dd02a4
fafca79
b82840a
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Why have different ways of hashing a command? Also, why bind the hashing algorithm to the cache library that we use? Why not allow using Caffeine as a cache store with Guava's hashing routine? That would mean another interface for hash computation.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@gerzse This is exactly what I'm trying to achieve.
Guava has a nice hash solution where we can do
newHasher().put(a).put(b).put(c).hash()
.But most other library only allows
function.hash(a)
. So we have to dofunction.hash(array[function.hash(a), function.hash(b), function.hash(c)])
.We can add an interface for later approach. But it makes the append style approach of Guava unusable (hashing is still possible in second way).
On the other hand, if we create an interface to support the first approach, it makes most hashing libraries unusable.
Now, what is best approach we can do?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
IMHO let's share with users a comment on why this function. Be kind to our future selves and community.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Sure... we'll also need why Caffeine, why Guava, why not only one, etc.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
100%