10:57 a.m.
Hi,
I am working on an issue in the domain model for HornetQ cluster
configuration[1].
To be configured properly, I want to specify only a multicast-address
and multicast-port but not the local port (and let the OS open one).
According to jboss-as-config XSD (and brian ;) ), it's correct, the port
attribute of socket-bindingType is indeed optional.
However, we had multiple places in the code where the port is considered
mandatory.
I have started to change these places to have a consistent semantic
between the XSD and the domain model but I have a test failing and I
can't figure out where is the code responsible for that.
In my branch, I have configured the messaging subsystem[2] with this
<socket-binding> (no port defined):
<socket-binding name="messaging-group"
multicast-address="231.7.7.7"
multicast-port="9876"/>
But when I run the test suite, I end up with a standalone file[3] where
the port attribute is set to "undefined"
<socket-binding name="messaging-group" port="undefined"
multicast-address="231.7.7.7" multicast-port="9876"/>
Newbie question: where is the code in charge of generating the
standalone file from the messaging.xml subsystem? I am not yet familiar
with AS7 codebase...
AIUI, I need to make sure that if the port is not defined in the model,
it is not written to the XML either.
thanks,
jeff
[1] https://issues.jboss.org/browse/AS7-3881
[2] in build/src/main/resources/configuration/subsystems/messaging.xml
[3] in
testsuite/integration/smoke/target/jbossas/standalone/configuration/standalone-full-ha.xml
--
Jeff Mesnil
JBoss, a division of Red Hat
http://jmesnil.net/
11:04 a.m.
On 3/19/12 10:57 AM, Jeff Mesnil wrote:
Hi,
I am working on an issue in the domain model for HornetQ cluster
configuration[1].
To be configured properly, I want to specify only a multicast-address
and multicast-port but not the local port (and let the OS open one).
According to jboss-as-config XSD (and brian ;) ), it's correct, the port
attribute of socket-bindingType is indeed optional.
However, we had multiple places in the code where the port is considered
mandatory.
I have started to change these places to have a consistent semantic
between the XSD and the domain model but I have a test failing and I
can't figure out where is the code responsible for that.
In my branch, I have configured the messaging subsystem[2] with this
<socket-binding> (no port defined):
<socket-binding name="messaging-group"
multicast-address="231.7.7.7"
multicast-port="9876"/>
But when I run the test suite, I end up with a standalone file[3] where
the port attribute is set to "undefined"
<socket-binding name="messaging-group" port="undefined"
multicast-address="231.7.7.7" multicast-port="9876"/>
Newbie question: where is the code in charge of generating the
standalone file from the messaging.xml subsystem? I am not yet familiar
with AS7 codebase...
AIUI, I need to make sure that if the port is not defined in the model,
it is not written to the XML either.
It's in CommonXml in the controller module. I can see it does not check
to verify the attribute is defined.
--
Jason T. Greene
JBoss AS Lead / EAP Platform Architect
JBoss, a division of Red Hat
12:01 p.m.
On 03/19/2012 05:04 PM, Jason T. Greene wrote:
On 3/19/12 10:57 AM, Jeff Mesnil wrote:
> Newbie question: where is the code in charge of generating the
> standalone file from the messaging.xml subsystem? I am not yet familiar
> with AS7 codebase...
> AIUI, I need to make sure that if the port is not defined in the model,
> it is not written to the XML either.
It's in CommonXml in the controller module. I can see it does not check
to verify the attribute is defined.
D'uh! I modified the code to parse the socket-binding in the same file.
I lost my way after that :)
thanks jason!
--
Jeff Mesnil
JBoss, a division of Red Hat
http://jmesnil.net/
5:38 a.m.
On 3/19/12 10:57 AM, Jeff Mesnil wrote:
> I am working on an issue in the domain model for HornetQ cluster
> configuration[1].
> To be configured properly, I want to specify only a multicast-address
> and multicast-port but not the local port (and let the OS open one).
I fixed the code to use properly a socket-binding for HornetQ cluster
configuration.
Now, I want to be able to run separate clusters on the same network
(that's the original issue raised by QA ).
I will do that by adding a property extension to the messaging-group's
multicast-address:
<socket-binding name="messaging-group"
multicast-address="${jboss.hornetq.cluster.address:231.7.7.7}"
multicast-port="9876"/>
1) What's the convention for naming this property?
jboss.hornetq.cluster.address or jboss.messaging.group.address something
else?
2) At first, I wanted to run separate clusters using port offset.
However there is nothing similar for the multicast-port. Does that make
sense to add it or is it really specific to this HornetQ conf?
thanks,
jeff
[1] https://issues.jboss.org/browse/JBPAPP-8178
--
Jeff Mesnil
JBoss, a division of Red Hat
http://jmesnil.net/
5:57 a.m.
On 20 Mar 2012, at 10:38, Jeff Mesnil wrote:
> On 3/19/12 10:57 AM, Jeff Mesnil wrote:
>> I am working on an issue in the domain model for HornetQ cluster
>> configuration[1].
>> To be configured properly, I want to specify only a multicast-address
>> and multicast-port but not the local port (and let the OS open one).
I fixed the code to use properly a socket-binding for HornetQ cluster
configuration.
Now, I want to be able to run separate clusters on the same network
(that's the original issue raised by QA ).
I will do that by adding a property extension to the messaging-group's
multicast-address:
<socket-binding name="messaging-group"
multicast-address="${jboss.hornetq.cluster.address:231.7.7.7}"
multicast-port="9876"/>
1) What's the convention for naming this property?
jboss.hornetq.cluster.address or jboss.messaging.group.address something
else?
I think jboss.messaging.group.address looks more the convention used already
for the socket bindings
2) At first, I wanted to run separate clusters using port offset.
However there is nothing similar for the multicast-port. Does that make
sense to add it or is it really specific to this HornetQ conf?
I think something specific makes it look too "complex" for your average user, so
perhaps simply
<socket-binding name="messaging-group"
multicast-address="${jboss.messaging.group.address:231.7.7.7}"
multicast-port="${jboss.messaging.group.port:9876}"/>
Then whatever starts the two clusters uses different values for the port for the two
clusters?
thanks,
jeff
[1] https://issues.jboss.org/browse/JBPAPP-8178
--
Jeff Mesnil
JBoss, a division of Red Hat
http://jmesnil.net/
_______________________________________________
jboss-as7-dev mailing list
jboss-as7-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-as7-dev
6:02 a.m.
On 03/20/2012 11:57 AM, Kabir Khan wrote:
> 1) What's the convention for naming this property?
> jboss.hornetq.cluster.address or jboss.messaging.group.address something
> else?
I think jboss.messaging.group.address looks more the convention used already for the
socket bindings
ok
> 2) At first, I wanted to run separate clusters using port
offset.
> However there is nothing similar for the multicast-port. Does that make
> sense to add it or is it really specific to this HornetQ conf?
I think something specific makes it look too "complex" for your average user,
so perhaps simply
> <socket-binding name="messaging-group"
> multicast-address="${jboss.messaging.group.address:231.7.7.7}"
> multicast-port="${jboss.messaging.group.port:9876}"/>
Yeah, good suggestion, I'll do it.
thanks,
jeff
--
Jeff Mesnil
JBoss, a division of Red Hat
http://jmesnil.net/
4661
days inactive
4662
days old
5 comments
3 participants
participants (3)
-
Jason T. Greene -
Jeff Mesnil -
Kabir Khan