Make async API great again

[Semyon Boikov]

Hi Taras,

Why 'async' methods return ComputeTaskFuture, not just IgniteFuture? It
seems that ComputeTaskFuture is needed only for tasks?




On Fri, Jan 20, 2017 at 5:18 PM, Taras Ledkov <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Gents
>
> I've done changes of the IgniteCompute as a subtask of the whole async API
> refactoring (https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-4580).
> Please check the new version of the public API (
> https://github.com/gridgain/apache-ignite/blob/b81621bf2e8a
> 35b20989f95ff52c0f6d91dd75d6/modules/core/src/main/java/
> org/apache/ignite/IgniteCompute.java)
>
> Please look through the new API and let me know any comments.
>
> --
> Taras Ledkov
> Mail-To: [hidden email]
>
>

[Vladimir Ozerov]

IgniteCompute was designed this way initially. See IgniteCompute.future()
override. May be it makes sense to leave this type only for execute(...)
methods.

On Fri, Jan 20, 2017 at 5:45 PM, Semyon Boikov <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hi Taras,
>
> Why 'async' methods return ComputeTaskFuture, not just IgniteFuture? It
> seems that ComputeTaskFuture is needed only for tasks?
>
>
>
>
> On Fri, Jan 20, 2017 at 5:18 PM, Taras Ledkov <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
> > Gents
> >
> > I've done changes of the IgniteCompute as a subtask of the whole async
> API
> > refactoring (https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-4580).
> > Please check the new version of the public API (
> > https://github.com/gridgain/apache-ignite/blob/b81621bf2e8a
> > 35b20989f95ff52c0f6d91dd75d6/modules/core/src/main/java/
> > org/apache/ignite/IgniteCompute.java)
> >
> > Please look through the new API and let me know any comments.
> >
> > --
> > Taras Ledkov
> > Mail-To: [hidden email]
> >
> >
>

[Taras Ledkov]

Each compute method produces task. For 'run', 'call' etc. methods the
classes of tasks are internal.
There are tests checking the task session by ComputeTaskFuture for these
methods.
I think we have to leave real class of future is
ComputeTaskInternalFuture#ComputeFuture to compatibility.

The class of the future at the public API may be changed.


On 20.01.2017 17:54, Vladimir Ozerov wrote:

> IgniteCompute was designed this way initially. See IgniteCompute.future()
> override. May be it makes sense to leave this type only for execute(...)
> methods.
>
> On Fri, Jan 20, 2017 at 5:45 PM, Semyon Boikov <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> Hi Taras,
>>
>> Why 'async' methods return ComputeTaskFuture, not just IgniteFuture? It
>> seems that ComputeTaskFuture is needed only for tasks?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Jan 20, 2017 at 5:18 PM, Taras Ledkov <[hidden email]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Gents
>>>
>>> I've done changes of the IgniteCompute as a subtask of the whole async
>> API
>>> refactoring (https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-4580).
>>> Please check the new version of the public API (
>>> https://github.com/gridgain/apache-ignite/blob/b81621bf2e8a
>>> 35b20989f95ff52c0f6d91dd75d6/modules/core/src/main/java/
>>> org/apache/ignite/IgniteCompute.java)
>>>
>>> Please look through the new API and let me know any comments.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Taras Ledkov
>>> Mail-To: [hidden email]
>>>
>>>

--
Taras Ledkov
Mail-To: [hidden email]

[Vladimir Ozerov]

Igniters,

I am glad to announce that old async-style is finally deprecated and now
all asynchronous methods are defined explicitly! Woohoo! Thanks to Taras
for this important contribution.

On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 6:12 PM, Taras Ledkov <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Each compute method produces task. For 'run', 'call' etc. methods the
> classes of tasks are internal.
> There are tests checking the task session by ComputeTaskFuture for these
> methods.
> I think we have to leave real class of future is
> ComputeTaskInternalFuture#ComputeFuture to compatibility.
>
> The class of the future at the public API may be changed.
>
>
>
> On 20.01.2017 17:54, Vladimir Ozerov wrote:
>
>> IgniteCompute was designed this way initially. See IgniteCompute.future()
>> override. May be it makes sense to leave this type only for execute(...)
>> methods.
>>
>> On Fri, Jan 20, 2017 at 5:45 PM, Semyon Boikov <[hidden email]>
>> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Taras,
>>>
>>> Why 'async' methods return ComputeTaskFuture, not just IgniteFuture? It
>>> seems that ComputeTaskFuture is needed only for tasks?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Jan 20, 2017 at 5:18 PM, Taras Ledkov <[hidden email]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Gents
>>>>
>>>> I've done changes of the IgniteCompute as a subtask of the whole async
>>>>
>>> API
>>>
>>>> refactoring (https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-4580).
>>>> Please check the new version of the public API (
>>>> https://github.com/gridgain/apache-ignite/blob/b81621bf2e8a
>>>> 35b20989f95ff52c0f6d91dd75d6/modules/core/src/main/java/
>>>> org/apache/ignite/IgniteCompute.java)
>>>>
>>>> Please look through the new API and let me know any comments.
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Taras Ledkov
>>>> Mail-To: [hidden email]
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
> --
> Taras Ledkov
> Mail-To: [hidden email]
>
>

[Sergei Egorov]

Cool!

Please check my neighboring thread about special .to() method on
IgniteFuture to make it even better :)

On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 1:32 PM Vladimir Ozerov <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> Igniters,
>
> I am glad to announce that old async-style is finally deprecated and now
> all asynchronous methods are defined explicitly! Woohoo! Thanks to Taras
> for this important contribution.
>
> On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 6:12 PM, Taras Ledkov <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
> > Each compute method produces task. For 'run', 'call' etc. methods the
> > classes of tasks are internal.
> > There are tests checking the task session by ComputeTaskFuture for these
> > methods.
> > I think we have to leave real class of future is
> > ComputeTaskInternalFuture#ComputeFuture to compatibility.
> >
> > The class of the future at the public API may be changed.
> >
> >
> >
> > On 20.01.2017 17:54, Vladimir Ozerov wrote:
> >
> >> IgniteCompute was designed this way initially. See
> IgniteCompute.future()
> >> override. May be it makes sense to leave this type only for execute(...)
> >> methods.
> >>
> >> On Fri, Jan 20, 2017 at 5:45 PM, Semyon Boikov <[hidden email]>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi Taras,
> >>>
> >>> Why 'async' methods return ComputeTaskFuture, not just IgniteFuture? It
> >>> seems that ComputeTaskFuture is needed only for tasks?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Fri, Jan 20, 2017 at 5:18 PM, Taras Ledkov <[hidden email]>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Gents
> >>>>
> >>>> I've done changes of the IgniteCompute as a subtask of the whole async
> >>>>
> >>> API
> >>>
> >>>> refactoring (https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-4580).
> >>>> Please check the new version of the public API (
> >>>> https://github.com/gridgain/apache-ignite/blob/b81621bf2e8a
> >>>> 35b20989f95ff52c0f6d91dd75d6/modules/core/src/main/java/
> >>>> org/apache/ignite/IgniteCompute.java)
> >>>>
> >>>> Please look through the new API and let me know any comments.
> >>>>
> >>>> --
> >>>> Taras Ledkov
> >>>> Mail-To: [hidden email]
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> > --
> > Taras Ledkov
> > Mail-To: [hidden email]
> >
> >
>

[dmagda]

Promising beginning of the week! So many talks in the past and finally we came to the logical end.

Thanks to both of you Taras and Vovan to making this real ;)

Could any of you update the Migration Guide simplifying the life for those who will be migrating from AI 1.x?
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Apache+Ignite+2.0+Migration+Guide <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Apache+Ignite+2.0+Migration+Guide>

—
Denis

> On Mar 27, 2017, at 3:24 AM, Vladimir Ozerov <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Igniters,
>
> I am glad to announce that old async-style is finally deprecated and now
> all asynchronous methods are defined explicitly! Woohoo! Thanks to Taras
> for this important contribution.
>
> On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 6:12 PM, Taras Ledkov <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> Each compute method produces task. For 'run', 'call' etc. methods the
>> classes of tasks are internal.
>> There are tests checking the task session by ComputeTaskFuture for these
>> methods.
>> I think we have to leave real class of future is
>> ComputeTaskInternalFuture#ComputeFuture to compatibility.
>>
>> The class of the future at the public API may be changed.
>>
>>
>>
>> On 20.01.2017 17:54, Vladimir Ozerov wrote:
>>
>>> IgniteCompute was designed this way initially. See IgniteCompute.future()
>>> override. May be it makes sense to leave this type only for execute(...)
>>> methods.
>>>
>>> On Fri, Jan 20, 2017 at 5:45 PM, Semyon Boikov <[hidden email]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Taras,
>>>>
>>>> Why 'async' methods return ComputeTaskFuture, not just IgniteFuture? It
>>>> seems that ComputeTaskFuture is needed only for tasks?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Jan 20, 2017 at 5:18 PM, Taras Ledkov <[hidden email]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Gents
>>>>>
>>>>> I've done changes of the IgniteCompute as a subtask of the whole async
>>>>>
>>>> API
>>>>
>>>>> refactoring (https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-4580).
>>>>> Please check the new version of the public API (
>>>>> https://github.com/gridgain/apache-ignite/blob/b81621bf2e8a
>>>>> 35b20989f95ff52c0f6d91dd75d6/modules/core/src/main/java/
>>>>> org/apache/ignite/IgniteCompute.java)
>>>>>
>>>>> Please look through the new API and let me know any comments.
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Taras Ledkov
>>>>> Mail-To: [hidden email]
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>> --
>> Taras Ledkov
>> Mail-To: [hidden email]
>>
>>