You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
It's still under discussion whether we should take care of the promises overhead. It's discussed at #320. This sub issue makes sense only if the conclusion for the issue turns out to be that we need sync mode.
As @wanderview analyzed in #320 (comment), there should not any big performance difference between them.
But as I questioned in #320 (comment), readBatch() and getSyncReader() have different power for recognition of the consumer's signal. This comment by me elaborates the first bullet point in the comment by Ben.
Domenic +1-ed readAllAvailable() at #320 (comment) to avoid confusion.
So, currently I see 3 approaches:
provide readAllAvailable() on async reader
provide readBatch(N) on async reader
add getSyncReader()
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
tyoshino
changed the title
readBatch() or getSyncReader()
readBatch(), readAllAvailable() or getSyncReader()
Apr 13, 2015
Sub issue for #320.
It's still under discussion whether we should take care of the promises overhead. It's discussed at #320. This sub issue makes sense only if the conclusion for the issue turns out to be that we need sync mode.
As @wanderview analyzed in #320 (comment), there should not any big performance difference between them.
But as I questioned in #320 (comment),
readBatch()
andgetSyncReader()
have different power for recognition of the consumer's signal. This comment by me elaborates the first bullet point in the comment by Ben.Domenic +1-ed readAllAvailable() at #320 (comment) to avoid confusion.
So, currently I see 3 approaches:
readAllAvailable()
on async readerreadBatch(N)
on async readergetSyncReader()
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: