[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!