uPortal IRC Logs-2014-01-22

[09:34:44 CST(-0600)] <lfuller> anyone out there used hazelcast? Giving it a look now that Greg Luck has moved over.

[09:35:56 CST(-0600)] <jwennmacher> Cool. No unfortunately I have not.

[09:47:34 CST(-0600)] <apetro__> lfuller , perhaps you and yours would enjoy attending the Apereo Camp next week and enjoying among other activities this sesssion: https://www.google.com/moderator/#15/e=20ac4d&t=20ac4d.40&f=20ac4d.6d5c32&q=20ac4d.6d5c32&v=4

[09:57:53 CST(-0600)] <holdorph> Hazelcast is a lesser baked Terracotta

[09:59:03 CST(-0600)] <holdorph> if you really need Hazelcast then one of two things is true. You need very minimal, easily serializable data shared among some servers. Or... you don't want to learn Terracotta, because it's more complex.

[09:59:41 CST(-0600)] <holdorph> Hazelcast isn't bad, it just doesn't do as much. Especially if you need to share complicated objects across servers.

[10:00:20 CST(-0600)] <holdorph> I also don't remember clearly, but I don't think it does the partial object updates either, so it would be less performant then Terracotta.

[10:00:33 CST(-0600)] <holdorph> But it's definitely simpler/easier code.

[10:17:44 CST(-0600)] <lfuller> thanks!

[10:23:58 CST(-0600)] <apetro__> thoughts on desirable uPortal-related session proposals for Apereo 2014 conference?

[15:19:12 CST(-0600)] <apetro__> anyone know offhand if a Fragment Owner user must be a member of the Fragment Owners group for DLM to find the fragment?

[15:23:59 CST(-0600)] <drewwills> nope

[15:24:04 CST(-0600)] <jwennmacher> don't know

[15:24:13 CST(-0600)] <jwennmacher> Does nope mean no, or don't know?

[15:27:10 CST(-0600)] <drewwills> that group is a convenience for defining the audience of the fragment-admin-exit, iirc

[15:27:34 CST(-0600)] <drewwills> idk if it's used in other ways... of wait, yes...the group is in Portal System

[15:27:55 CST(-0600)] <drewwills> which means it can see/do certain things that reg users normally can't