Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

(change) Change cache in openfeature java provider #1985

Open
thomaspoignant opened this issue Jun 12, 2024 · 0 comments
Open

(change) Change cache in openfeature java provider #1985

thomaspoignant opened this issue Jun 12, 2024 · 0 comments
Labels
change This is a change in the code that should not affect the users java open-feature p3 Longer term priority provider Related to a openfeature provider

Comments

@thomaspoignant
Copy link
Owner

Motivation

As mentioned by @liran2000 in this PR comment open-feature/java-sdk-contrib#821 (comment) the cache system used in the java provider is from guava and they discouraged using it and recommend using caffeine instead.

Since it is a breaking change we didn't want to introduce it to the provider.

When going for version 1.0.0 of the provider we should consider changing the cache mechanism in favour of caffeine.

Requirements

We should refactor the provider to use caffeine instead of the guava cache.

To do so we will have to introduce a breaking change in the GoFeatureFlagProviderOptions file, to change the type of the cacheBuilder option.

When doing that we should ensure a proper documentation on how to migrate from guava to caffeine.

@thomaspoignant thomaspoignant added p3 Longer term priority change This is a change in the code that should not affect the users provider Related to a openfeature provider java open-feature labels Jun 12, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
change This is a change in the code that should not affect the users java open-feature p3 Longer term priority provider Related to a openfeature provider
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant