synapse-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From indika kumara <indika.k...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: startup order - correct place to start transport listeners
Date Mon, 06 Apr 2009 04:09:04 GMT
Ruwan

I never said that suggested approach is bad. if you have confidence
that approach will work , then it is good . Generally , a problem have
many solutions. I just say what I like.
You will go on your way. If it can achieve what we need , then it is a
good solution.

Thanks
Indika

On Sun, Apr 5, 2009 at 3:07 PM, Ruwan Linton <ruwan.linton@gmail.com> wrote:
> Indika,
>
> If we are going for such a change it has to go into axis2 and I think it is
> late to get this to axis2 1.5, and I think this is much cleaner.... can you
> point any issue with this approach? Any reasoning to not to add a start
> method....
>
> Thanks,
> Ruwan
>
> On Sun, Apr 5, 2009 at 12:24 PM, indika kumara <indika.kuma@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> Runwan
>>
>> I personally like, if there are some fixes need to be done on
>> transport layer, if it could be done.
>>
>> BTW, it is good if we can cope (by the implementation we are going to
>> do) transparently with current and future behaviors of transports as
>> synapse always operate top on that.
>>
>> Thanks
>> Indika
>>
>> On Sun, Apr 5, 2009 at 11:33 AM, Ruwan Linton <ruwan.linton@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> > Indika,
>> >
>> > I think having a start method is much cleaner than this, because
>> >
>> > listener manager doesn't support adding the transport in the maintenance
>> > mode...
>> > if we try to start and then put the transport into the maintenance mode
>> > even
>> > then there is a time where the transports are exposed to the external
>> > users
>> > before synapse initialization
>> > Not all the transports support maintenance mode
>> >
>> > So I would go with the above proposed approach, which is much cleaner.
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> > Ruwan
>> >
>> > On Sun, Apr 5, 2009 at 10:57 AM, indika kumara <indika.kuma@gmail.com>
>> > wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Hi All
>> >>
>> >> I am not sure but could we achieve following event sequence?
>> >>
>> >> Initializing…………….
>> >>
>> >> Initialized and start transport on graceful mode
>> >> Create synapse configuration
>> >> Create synapse environment
>> >> Initialized synapse configuration
>> >> Change the mode of listeners to fully active
>> >>
>> >> Shouting down ……………….
>> >>
>> >> Signal to change the mode of transport into graceful
>> >> destroy synapse configuration and synapse environment
>> >> Signal to completely destroy transport
>> >>
>> >> Could we achieve what we need with above order sequence of events? If
>> >> it can, I feel we never want to change any API.
>> >>
>> >> Thanks
>> >> Indika
>> >>
>> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@synapse.apache.org
>> >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@synapse.apache.org
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Ruwan Linton
>> > Senior Software Engineer & Product Manager; WSO2 ESB;
>> > http://wso2.org/esb
>> > WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.org
>> > email: ruwan@wso2.com; cell: +94 77 341 3097
>> > blog: http://ruwansblog.blogspot.com
>> >
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@synapse.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@synapse.apache.org
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Ruwan Linton
> Senior Software Engineer & Product Manager; WSO2 ESB; http://wso2.org/esb
> WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.org
> email: ruwan@wso2.com; cell: +94 77 341 3097
> blog: http://ruwansblog.blogspot.com
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@synapse.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@synapse.apache.org


Mime
View raw message