You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@directmemory.apache.org by Ashish <pa...@gmail.com> on 2011/10/18 07:05:56 UTC
Objective of DirectMemory project?
Folks,
Sorry for this simple questions, but whenever I read the project
description of DirectMemory it slightly confuses me.
The confusion stems from the statement "Apache DirectMemory is a multi
layered cache implementation..", which I interpret as DirectMemory is
a cache implementation, which features offheap store meaning stores
elements outside heap.
So confusion is around
1. Are we going to have a Cache implementation which stores all data
offheap or some onheap and some offheap?
2. Or are we focused on creating a Data Store which is offheap and can
be plugged in as data store of other cache implementation? In this
case we are focussed on creating our own Offheap Map implementation.
Just to have more clarity to focus on implementation.
--
thanks
ashish
Blog: http://www.ashishpaliwal.com/blog
My Photo Galleries: http://www.pbase.com/ashishpaliwal
Re: Objective of DirectMemory project?
Posted by Ashish <pa...@gmail.com>.
On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 12:39 PM, Raffaele P. Guidi
<ra...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I tried to clarify on this before (see the proposed roadmap): I started with
> off heap, then tried to do too much doing a complete cache solution (it
> didn't work well), then decided to focus again on off heap and did a
> complete rewrite. In short the proposal is to keep focus on the off heap
> part but add some basic cache features to ease and spread adoption.
Oops, Sorry missed that. This is cool and really help in focussing our
energies :)
Apology for the noise.
>
> Uhm I suspect the roadmap has got lost in the switch to confluence but it
> should be in an email to dev as well, gotta look for it and put in the wiki
> again.
This would be good, as people shall look for this later as well.
>
> Ciao,
> R
>
> On Tuesday, October 18, 2011, Ashish <pa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Folks,
>>
>> Sorry for this simple questions, but whenever I read the project
>> description of DirectMemory it slightly confuses me.
>>
>> The confusion stems from the statement "Apache DirectMemory is a multi
>> layered cache implementation..", which I interpret as DirectMemory is
>> a cache implementation, which features offheap store meaning stores
>> elements outside heap.
>>
>> So confusion is around
>> 1. Are we going to have a Cache implementation which stores all data
>> offheap or some onheap and some offheap?
>> 2. Or are we focused on creating a Data Store which is offheap and can
>> be plugged in as data store of other cache implementation? In this
>> case we are focussed on creating our own Offheap Map implementation.
>>
>> Just to have more clarity to focus on implementation.
>>
>> --
>> thanks
>> ashish
>>
>> Blog: http://www.ashishpaliwal.com/blog
>> My Photo Galleries: http://www.pbase.com/ashishpaliwal
>>
>
--
thanks
ashish
Blog: http://www.ashishpaliwal.com/blog
My Photo Galleries: http://www.pbase.com/ashishpaliwal
Re: Objective of DirectMemory project?
Posted by "Raffaele P. Guidi" <ra...@gmail.com>.
I published the original email as a blog post in confluence. Too bad I've
lost some of the modifications with your feedback from the mailing list
(don't feel guilty, Tim!, I should have thought about that when I asked to
switch! :D);
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/DIRECTMEMORY/2011/10/18/Apache+DirectMemory+-+initial+roadmap+discussion
Probably it will be a good idea to split each section in a separate wiki
page that can evolve over time (at least this is what I do usually in my
projects).
Ciao,
R
On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 2:05 PM, Julien Vermillard <jv...@gmail.com>wrote:
> Would be cool to have the roadmap somewhere in confluence :)
>
> On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 1:17 PM, Tim Williams <wi...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > Cool, you're now added... many thanks to infra@ :)
> >
> > Thanks,
> > --tim
> >
> > On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 7:06 AM, Raffaele P. Guidi
> > <ra...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> Yep, done. ID is raffaeleguidi
> >>
> >> On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 1:05 PM, Raffaele P. Guidi <
> >> raffaele.p.guidi@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> No prob, I'll just copy & paste it again from the emal :) You were
> right I
> >>> was not registered to confluence, I'm trying again (it seems I have
> >>> connectivity issues)
> >>>
> >>> Ciao,
> >>> R
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 12:41 PM, Tim Williams <williamstw@gmail.com
> >wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 3:09 AM, Raffaele P. Guidi
> >>>> <ra...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>> > I tried to clarify on this before (see the proposed roadmap): I
> started
> >>>> with
> >>>> > off heap, then tried to do too much doing a complete cache solution
> (it
> >>>> > didn't work well), then decided to focus again on off heap and did a
> >>>> > complete rewrite. In short the proposal is to keep focus on the off
> heap
> >>>> > part but add some basic cache features to ease and spread adoption.
> >>>> >
> >>>> > Uhm I suspect the roadmap has got lost in the switch to confluence
> but
> >>>> it
> >>>> > should be in an email to dev as well, gotta look for it and put in
> the
> >>>> wiki
> >>>> > again.
> >>>>
> >>>> Ooops... sorry about that Raffaele!
> >>>>
> >>>> --tim
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >
>
Re: Objective of DirectMemory project?
Posted by Julien Vermillard <jv...@gmail.com>.
Would be cool to have the roadmap somewhere in confluence :)
On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 1:17 PM, Tim Williams <wi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Cool, you're now added... many thanks to infra@ :)
>
> Thanks,
> --tim
>
> On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 7:06 AM, Raffaele P. Guidi
> <ra...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Yep, done. ID is raffaeleguidi
>>
>> On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 1:05 PM, Raffaele P. Guidi <
>> raffaele.p.guidi@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> No prob, I'll just copy & paste it again from the emal :) You were right I
>>> was not registered to confluence, I'm trying again (it seems I have
>>> connectivity issues)
>>>
>>> Ciao,
>>> R
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 12:41 PM, Tim Williams <wi...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 3:09 AM, Raffaele P. Guidi
>>>> <ra...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> > I tried to clarify on this before (see the proposed roadmap): I started
>>>> with
>>>> > off heap, then tried to do too much doing a complete cache solution (it
>>>> > didn't work well), then decided to focus again on off heap and did a
>>>> > complete rewrite. In short the proposal is to keep focus on the off heap
>>>> > part but add some basic cache features to ease and spread adoption.
>>>> >
>>>> > Uhm I suspect the roadmap has got lost in the switch to confluence but
>>>> it
>>>> > should be in an email to dev as well, gotta look for it and put in the
>>>> wiki
>>>> > again.
>>>>
>>>> Ooops... sorry about that Raffaele!
>>>>
>>>> --tim
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
Re: Objective of DirectMemory project?
Posted by Tim Williams <wi...@gmail.com>.
Cool, you're now added... many thanks to infra@ :)
Thanks,
--tim
On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 7:06 AM, Raffaele P. Guidi
<ra...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Yep, done. ID is raffaeleguidi
>
> On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 1:05 PM, Raffaele P. Guidi <
> raffaele.p.guidi@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> No prob, I'll just copy & paste it again from the emal :) You were right I
>> was not registered to confluence, I'm trying again (it seems I have
>> connectivity issues)
>>
>> Ciao,
>> R
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 12:41 PM, Tim Williams <wi...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 3:09 AM, Raffaele P. Guidi
>>> <ra...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> > I tried to clarify on this before (see the proposed roadmap): I started
>>> with
>>> > off heap, then tried to do too much doing a complete cache solution (it
>>> > didn't work well), then decided to focus again on off heap and did a
>>> > complete rewrite. In short the proposal is to keep focus on the off heap
>>> > part but add some basic cache features to ease and spread adoption.
>>> >
>>> > Uhm I suspect the roadmap has got lost in the switch to confluence but
>>> it
>>> > should be in an email to dev as well, gotta look for it and put in the
>>> wiki
>>> > again.
>>>
>>> Ooops... sorry about that Raffaele!
>>>
>>> --tim
>>>
>>
>>
>
Re: Objective of DirectMemory project?
Posted by "Raffaele P. Guidi" <ra...@gmail.com>.
Yep, done. ID is raffaeleguidi
On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 1:05 PM, Raffaele P. Guidi <
raffaele.p.guidi@gmail.com> wrote:
> No prob, I'll just copy & paste it again from the emal :) You were right I
> was not registered to confluence, I'm trying again (it seems I have
> connectivity issues)
>
> Ciao,
> R
>
>
> On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 12:41 PM, Tim Williams <wi...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 3:09 AM, Raffaele P. Guidi
>> <ra...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > I tried to clarify on this before (see the proposed roadmap): I started
>> with
>> > off heap, then tried to do too much doing a complete cache solution (it
>> > didn't work well), then decided to focus again on off heap and did a
>> > complete rewrite. In short the proposal is to keep focus on the off heap
>> > part but add some basic cache features to ease and spread adoption.
>> >
>> > Uhm I suspect the roadmap has got lost in the switch to confluence but
>> it
>> > should be in an email to dev as well, gotta look for it and put in the
>> wiki
>> > again.
>>
>> Ooops... sorry about that Raffaele!
>>
>> --tim
>>
>
>
Re: Objective of DirectMemory project?
Posted by "Raffaele P. Guidi" <ra...@gmail.com>.
No prob, I'll just copy & paste it again from the emal :) You were right I
was not registered to confluence, I'm trying again (it seems I have
connectivity issues)
Ciao,
R
On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 12:41 PM, Tim Williams <wi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 3:09 AM, Raffaele P. Guidi
> <ra...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I tried to clarify on this before (see the proposed roadmap): I started
> with
> > off heap, then tried to do too much doing a complete cache solution (it
> > didn't work well), then decided to focus again on off heap and did a
> > complete rewrite. In short the proposal is to keep focus on the off heap
> > part but add some basic cache features to ease and spread adoption.
> >
> > Uhm I suspect the roadmap has got lost in the switch to confluence but it
> > should be in an email to dev as well, gotta look for it and put in the
> wiki
> > again.
>
> Ooops... sorry about that Raffaele!
>
> --tim
>
Re: Objective of DirectMemory project?
Posted by Tim Williams <wi...@gmail.com>.
On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 3:09 AM, Raffaele P. Guidi
<ra...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I tried to clarify on this before (see the proposed roadmap): I started with
> off heap, then tried to do too much doing a complete cache solution (it
> didn't work well), then decided to focus again on off heap and did a
> complete rewrite. In short the proposal is to keep focus on the off heap
> part but add some basic cache features to ease and spread adoption.
>
> Uhm I suspect the roadmap has got lost in the switch to confluence but it
> should be in an email to dev as well, gotta look for it and put in the wiki
> again.
Ooops... sorry about that Raffaele!
--tim
Re: Objective of DirectMemory project?
Posted by "Raffaele P. Guidi" <ra...@gmail.com>.
I tried to clarify on this before (see the proposed roadmap): I started with
off heap, then tried to do too much doing a complete cache solution (it
didn't work well), then decided to focus again on off heap and did a
complete rewrite. In short the proposal is to keep focus on the off heap
part but add some basic cache features to ease and spread adoption.
Uhm I suspect the roadmap has got lost in the switch to confluence but it
should be in an email to dev as well, gotta look for it and put in the wiki
again.
Ciao,
R
On Tuesday, October 18, 2011, Ashish <pa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Folks,
>
> Sorry for this simple questions, but whenever I read the project
> description of DirectMemory it slightly confuses me.
>
> The confusion stems from the statement "Apache DirectMemory is a multi
> layered cache implementation..", which I interpret as DirectMemory is
> a cache implementation, which features offheap store meaning stores
> elements outside heap.
>
> So confusion is around
> 1. Are we going to have a Cache implementation which stores all data
> offheap or some onheap and some offheap?
> 2. Or are we focused on creating a Data Store which is offheap and can
> be plugged in as data store of other cache implementation? In this
> case we are focussed on creating our own Offheap Map implementation.
>
> Just to have more clarity to focus on implementation.
>
> --
> thanks
> ashish
>
> Blog: http://www.ashishpaliwal.com/blog
> My Photo Galleries: http://www.pbase.com/ashishpaliwal
>