This repository has been archived by the owner on Mar 16, 2022. It is now read-only.
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 97
Passivation configured in language supports via the discovery protocol #486
Merged
pvlugter
merged 17 commits into
cloudstateio:master
from
ralphlaude:passivation-per-entity-type
Dec 17, 2020
Merged
Changes from 4 commits
Commits
Show all changes
17 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
efdf843
allow the proxy to configure passivation for entity type.
ralphlaude b711740
add settings for entity type
ralphlaude f01a206
Merge branch 'master' into passivation-per-entity-type
ralphlaude 62c461c
Add passivation timeout in the java-support and the entity discovery
ralphlaude 10e056a
extend the discovery process to support passivation strategy and use …
ralphlaude 296cbe3
restore default passivation strategy timeout in the proxy. Combine th…
ralphlaude 1079f94
removed env-vars for passivation timeout
ralphlaude 549bd1b
removed unused imports
ralphlaude 6225e25
add specification description for the passivation strategy
ralphlaude 982044b
add holder for the default config and use in CloudStateRunner and for…
ralphlaude 7cc33b8
change config holder to save and pass down the config. add tck test f…
ralphlaude e56283c
Merge branch 'master' into passivation-per-entity-type
ralphlaude 0d84bf2
merged master
ralphlaude b11db95
increase passivation timeout for CI tests
ralphlaude 937ec55
let the TCK tests failed for language support which does not yet impl…
ralphlaude 1e6cdb5
test passivation only in the TCK model
ralphlaude cc7ba5a
remove global config for accessing configured passivation timeout
ralphlaude File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Hello Guy I didn't like this option for me it should be done at the Entity registration stage and not at the entity itself.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Hi Adriano, it is also fine for me and it is easier. Why do you like the option over the registration?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Great! Thanks
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
why do you like this option?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Why would 0 not be a valid value? And therefore passivation disabled at all?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I agree to change the protocol now and a soon as possible for such changes. I also agree on not depending on magic values.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think I'd like to have options for expression the following things - perhaps not immediately, but we should choose a mechanism and protocol that allows us to add support for them in future if needed:
So, basically, I think it's worth now choosing a strategy in the APIs and protocol that will allow us to add some of the features above without breaking the protocol or APIs.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Good idea to future-proof the protocol and APIs now for other passivation options.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Really good idea for passivation options.
More generally we should have a strategy for adding other future options (not only passivation) without breaking the protocol or the APIs.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
After some more discussion:
timeout
, ideally we can addnever
orimmediate
or other strategies in a protocol-compatible waytimeout
,never
orimmediate
, and not use magic values