jsr339-experts@jax-rs-spec.java.net

[jsr339-experts] Re: [jax-rs-spec users] Using JSR107 "JCache" with JAX-RS 2.0

From: Marek Potociar <marek.potociar_at_oracle.com>
Date: Sat, 27 Oct 2012 18:05:39 +0200

Is it already clear what APIs are we talking about? AFAIK, we're hoping JCache will make it into EE7, but it is still not guaranteed.

Marek

On Oct 27, 2012, at 3:50 PM, Markus KARG <markus_at_headcrashing.eu> wrote:

> Experts,
>
> The JSR107 expert group, lead by Ehcache founder Greg Luck, defined a Java caching API which will be part of Java EE 7. The API allows to plug in a cache to virtually anything that needs to be cached. This opens some interesting scenarios in the JAX-RS world, like explicitly annotating JAX-RS resource methods with JCache annotations to get "automatic cache integration" with @GET and @PUT methods, etc., or like writing a filter and / or entity interceptor using the JCache API to put / get cache entries in a transparent way (hence not cluttering the JAX-RS resources with annotations).
>
> I think it is obviously that caching will speed up any client and / or server by reducing unnecessary data transmission or transformation, and that the existence of a Java EE standard for accessing caches opens the doors for automatic cache support for a lot of other Java EE standards like here JAX-RS 2.0, so we should talk about that.
>
> Since there might be clarifications needed how JCache API relates the JAX-RS API (possibly support inside of a JAX-RS implementation is needed, or there might be interest on either side to provide one single common JCache based "generic" JAX-RS filter or interceptor to not have all users to write this on their own, which could be provided as part of the JAX-RS RI as a joint JSR107/JSR339 effort), I want to suggest that both teams negotiate whether either of the specs need to have some clarifications added to support this.
>
> Better to discuss HOW to integratate JCache with JAX-RS NOW than waiting until lots of users complain about things being unclear or not operational later.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Markus