[
http://opensource.atlassian.com/projects/hibernate/browse/HSEARCH-880?pag...
]
Emmanuel Bernard commented on HSEARCH-880:
------------------------------------------
h2. What is a serialization provider id in practice?
{quote}I'd say it should be short as it's transmitted, but also if these ids are
global (scoped to the SearchFactory) then ids should be able to be assigned dynamically,
making me think about a fully qualified class name of an implementor.
Proposal: remove it, and consider the serialization provider coupled to the IndexManager
(identified by the index name already). As far as dynamic configuration goes, we'll
support the option to start/stop new IndexManagers but not to reconfigure an existing one
(at least not without stop+start).
Do we need a serialization provider id? In other words, do we need to be able to
hot-upgrade the SerializationProvider in a cluster?
Exactly, I would say no for the reasons I just mentioned.{quote}
Dynamically assigning them is scaring me as the numbers might not be unique across a
cluster or upon restart. It also makes debugging very hard as these numbers would change
"at random".
Also, if someone wants to change the serialization provider, it needs to stop the whole
cluster making sure the master has processed all remaining messages before changing the
configuration and restarting the cluster. The serialization id could prevent that.
Also as discussed in [the previous comment|#comment-43371], the serialization id helps
differentiate a version number from another provider
Discussion on how to support backward / forward compatible
serialization layer
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Key: HSEARCH-880
URL:
http://opensource.atlassian.com/projects/hibernate/browse/HSEARCH-880
Project: Hibernate Search
Issue Type: New Feature
Components: serialization
Reporter: Emmanuel Bernard
Fix For: 4.0
h1. General principles
The serialized message needs the following elements:
* index name: to redirect the flux to the appropriate backend
* serialization provider id: if not present, a cluster must make sure to use the same
SerializationProvider for a given IndexManager
* protocol version: today the version is major.minor where the major increase means
incompatibility at the stream level, whereas minor means compatibility but with missing
features
* stream: this is the SerializationProvider specific byte[]
bq. Do we need a serialization provider id? In other words, do we need to be able to
hot-upgrade the SerializationProvider in a cluster?
h1. Exchanging messages in an heterogeneous cluster
h2. Cluster with one way communication (JMS)
In this case the master receives a message and must try and process it.
Receives an index name + serial provider id.
Use the serial provider id to deserialize the message.
If message_major > node_major, the serialization provider fails
If message_minor > node_minor, the serialization provider proceeds but some features
might not be supported and the deserialization might fail.
bq. this requires to send the Avro schema with each message which would be a huge loss to
support message_minor > node_minor
In the minor bump case:
* some feature might not be deserialized and simply ignored. A user is aware of the list
of features differences between each node.
* the stream might not be readable by an old version after all due to the use of some new
features => Exception
If message_major or message_minor < node_major or node_minor, we use the older
protocol deserializer.
bq. could there ever be a problem where a new HSearch Engine cannot deal with an old
HSearch engine's message?
h2. Cluster with two way communication (JGroups)
Each time a node A needs to send a message to a node B for the first time. It sends the
list of supported SerializationProvider id and for each the list of Versions supported.
The first SerializationProvider id is preferred and the latest versions are preferred.
A version is more recent if majorA > majorB and with majorA = majorB if minorA >
minorB.
Node B receives the handshake message and returns the appropriate serialization provider
id and version. Subsequent messages are exchanged with this accepted version between A and
B
bq. Is the JGroups clustering using multicast to send change messages ie does it know
which node it sends the message to to do the handshake?
bq. What happens if B goes down and back up? Does it have a "new" name that
uniquely identify it?
h1. API changes
SerializationProvider will need the following adjustments:
* a getSupportedVersions()
* a getSerializer(Version)
* a getDeserializer(Version)
bq. could it be that Serializer / Deserializer / LuceneWorksBuilder lead to the inability
to support a version n-1 (by adding of new methods or stuff like that?
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
For more information on JIRA, see:
http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira