January 2009 - jboss-dev-forums - Jboss List Archives

[Design of Messaging on JBoss (Messaging/JBoss)] - Re: Algorithm broken in WildcardAddressManager

by ataylor

anonymous wrote : How can you add a mapping for each allowable address if there are no allowable addresses? ..... | | Perhaps there is a terminology mix up here? By allowable address I'm assuming you mean a destination! so in SimpleAddressManager we would have | public boolean addDestination(final SimpleString address) | { | Bindings bindings = new BindingsImpl(); | mappings.putIfAbsent(address, bindings); | return destinations.addIfAbsent(address); | } this means that all destinations exist in the mappings object, except that they may have an empty Bindings object. This also means that when i check for matching addresses i don't have to check both the destinations and the mappings only the mappings. Taking this further if they exist in both destinations and mappings we don't need destinations, we can just check in the mappings, if theres an entry then its an allowable address, i.e. it has a mapping, empty or not. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4199744#4199744 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4199744

15 years, 3 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of Messaging on JBoss (Messaging/JBoss)] - Re: Algorithm broken in WildcardAddressManager

by timfox

"ataylor" wrote : ... If we add a mapping for each allowable address, How can you add a mapping for each allowable address if there are no allowable addresses? ..... Perhaps there is a terminology mix up here? View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4199742#4199742 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4199742

15 years, 3 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of Messaging on JBoss (Messaging/JBoss)] - Re: Algorithm broken in WildcardAddressManager

by ataylor

anonymous wrote : Allowable addresses are only used if checkAllowable = true. | | It's valid for the postoffice to have no allowable addresses, and wildcards must work then too. | | Checkallowable is really only true for JMS, where we have to trap sends to non-existent topics. it will still work when there are no allowable addresses. Their calculated from the mappings not the addresses. If we add a mapping for each allowable address, even if the bindings object is empty then we don't need to maintain allowable addresses. the contains destination method just checks the the keyset of mappings instead. anonymous wrote : That works if the queue already exists at the time the wildcard subscription is added. But what if the queue is added *after* the subscription is added? It does i have a test to cover this. anonymous wrote : Only if we only allow routing to allowable addresses at all times (I.e. effectively force checkAllowable to always be true) see earlier response. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4199741#4199741 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4199741

15 years, 3 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of Messaging on JBoss (Messaging/JBoss)] - Re: Algorithm broken in WildcardAddressManager

by timfox

"ataylor" wrote : ok, so instead of adding a mapping for an address when the first binding is added we do this for each allowable address. | Allowable addresses are only used if checkAllowable = true. It's valid for the postoffice to have no allowable addresses, and wildcards must work then too. Checkallowable is really only true for JMS, where we have to trap sends to non-existent topics. anonymous wrote : | for queues this is no different as its always added anyway, but for topics there'll be a mapping which contains an empty bindings object. This means that when a new consumer registers with a wildcard queue i can garauntee that theres always a mapping to check. so lets say the wildcard topic is topicjms.topic.* i can search the mappings to make sure that binding topicjms.topic.A also gets this binding registered with it. | That works if the queue already exists at the time the wildcard subscription is added. But what if the queue is added *after* the subscription is added? anonymous wrote : | Before i couldn't do this which is why i was pre calculating the whole map. | | actually come to think of it, we could remove allowable destinations completely and for containsDestination we could just use the keyset of the mappings. Only if we only allow routing to allowable addresses at all times (I.e. effectively force checkAllowable to always be true) View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4199736#4199736 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4199736

15 years, 3 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of Messaging on JBoss (Messaging/JBoss)] - Re: Algorithm broken in WildcardAddressManager

by ataylor

ok, so instead of adding a mapping for an address when the first binding is added we do this for each allowable address. for queues this is no different as its always added anyway, but for topics there'll be a mapping which contains an empty bindings object. This means that when a new consumer registers with a wildcard queue i can garauntee that theres always a mapping to check. so lets say the wildcard topic is topicjms.topic.* i can search the mappings to make sure that binding topicjms.topic.A also gets this binding registered with it. Before i couldn't do this which is why i was pre calculating the whole map. actually come to think of it, we could remove allowable destinations completely and for containsDestination we could just use the keyset of the mappings. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4199729#4199729 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4199729

15 years, 3 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of Messaging on JBoss (Messaging/JBoss)] - Re: Algorithm broken in WildcardAddressManager

by timfox

Andy - I'm not sure I follow your explanation - you add a Bindings object when a destination is added - do you mean an allowable destination? Can you explain in some more detail? View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4199722#4199722 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4199722

15 years, 3 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design the new POJO MicroContainer] - MutableClassInfo?

by kabir.khan＠jboss.com

Looking at using ClassInfo in AOP http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&t=148135 http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4199716#4199716 We will initially go from using two abstractions (reflect and javassist) to using three abstractions (reflect, javassist and ClassInfo). The reflect stuff can be got rid of, since the initial focus is on getting rid of duplicated code in our pointcut matchers. However, we will still end up with ClassInfo (for reading classes) and raw javassist (for modifying classes). I'm toying with the idea of being able to just use ClassInfo everywhere. Would there be any interest in MutableClassInfo/-MethodInfo etc. interfaces backed by javassist? The javassist versions of ClassInfo could implement those interfaces. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4199721#4199721 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4199721

15 years, 3 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of AOP on JBoss (Aspects/JBoss)] - Using ClassInfo in AOP

by kabir.khan＠jboss.com

StÃ¥le, I think the first thing to do is to fix jboss-reflect (alternatively hack together a prototype in aop before fixing this in jboss-reflect). http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4199605#4199605. I have not looked at the AOP side of this for a while, but the most important initial thing is to unify the duplicate code in the pointcut matchers so that they come in one version all using ClassInfo. I would concentrate on the weaving part first: Weaving ====== 1) Create a javassist Type/ClassInfo for the class being woven in the instrumentor from the CtClass and ClassLoader. 2) Modify the instrumentor, transformers and pointcut matchers to use ClassInfo instead of CtClass. We still want to use the raw CtClass when adding wrapper methods, inner classes etc. to the class being woven since ClassInfo does not support that. So the minimum required for this step is probably to use ClassInfo for what is passed into the matchers. Runtime ====== 1) When recaclulating the advisor chains use the reflect version of ClassInfo and modify the matchers to use that. Once this is done, we can look at other places to add ClassInfo. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4199716#4199716 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4199716

15 years, 3 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of Messaging on JBoss (Messaging/JBoss)] - Re: Algorithm broken in WildcardAddressManager

by ataylor

The main reason for doing it this way was 1 to keep calculating possible matching mappings out of the critical path, i.e. during send, and because since we don't add a mapping for topics, since there aren't any bindings, it was to make sure that no topics were missed. However, after a rethink theres now a better way to do this. Now there is a 'Bindings' object we can now have a mapping with an empty bindings object. All i need to change is to add an empty Bindings object when a destination is added. i.e. a consumer registers with a new queue topicjms.topic.*, at this point i can search the mappings to find topicjms.topic.A, which currently only has an empty bindings object and add the appropriate binding to this. this makes the code simpler and more scalable, ive added a test for a large number of dots and theres no problem. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4199708#4199708 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4199708

15 years, 3 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design the new POJO MicroContainer] - Re: Using ClassInfo in JBoss AOP

by kabir.khan＠jboss.com

You should be using the methods from the TypeInfo spi interface. | TypeInfo getTypeInfo(String name, ClassLoader cl) throws ClassNotFoundException; | could be made to work the way outlined above for JavassistTypeInfoFactoryImpl with some modifications to WeakClassCache. For the other methods I don't think there is much we can do View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4199707#4199707 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4199707

15 years, 3 months

1
0
0 / 0

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

jboss-dev-forums January 2009