-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 144
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
Re-write of channel management #279
Comments
pardahlman
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Oct 8, 2017
pardahlman
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Oct 8, 2017
These classes together makes it possible to easy create a unique channel pool in the operations pipes without creating any derived class.
pardahlman
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Oct 8, 2017
pardahlman
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Oct 8, 2017
pardahlman
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Oct 8, 2017
pardahlman
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Oct 8, 2017
This is done because it implies an internal channel pool in the factory. Pooling functionality exists in explicit pools, like StaticChannelPool etc.
pardahlman
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Oct 8, 2017
pardahlman
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Oct 8, 2017
pardahlman
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Oct 8, 2017
The connect to broker is done in the registration in order to remove virtual call and in order to re-register it to get a "lazy" behavior
pardahlman
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Oct 8, 2017
pardahlman
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Oct 8, 2017
pardahlman
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Oct 8, 2017
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
The
ChannelFactory
of today is a 300+ lines implementation that hold a channel pool and takes recovery of channels and connection into consideration, has dynamic pool scaling capabilities etc. Here's the vision for this re-write:ConnectToBroker()
calls from the constructor. This ties in the discussion in Polly Policies not Executing #268 (comment).The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: