[
http://jira.jboss.com/jira/browse/JGRP-563?page=comments#action_12388700 ]
Vladimir Blagojevic commented on JGRP-563:
------------------------------------------
We should have only four state installation callbacks:
public void getState(OutputStream ostream) throws Exception;
public void getState(String state_id, OutputStream ostream) throws Exception;
public void setState(InputStream istream) throws Exception;
public void setState(String state_id, InputStream istream) throws Exception;
Implementors are allowed to throw any Exception during installation.
This exception will be wrapped with StateTransferException and throw up
for clients of getState call.
Consolidate state transfer API to use streams
---------------------------------------------
Key: JGRP-563
URL:
http://jira.jboss.com/jira/browse/JGRP-563
Project: JGroups
Issue Type: Task
Reporter: Vladimir Blagojevic
Assigned To: Vladimir Blagojevic
Fix For: 3.0
Although streaming state transfer has its advantages over byte based state transfer, byte
based state transfer is absolutely necessary since streaming based transfer relies on
plain sockets that are not firewall friendly. However, that does not mean that we cannot
consolidate state transfer API at application level and mask byte based transfer with
streams. We have already done this in JBC 2.0 so there is no reason not to do it on
JGroups level as well.
Advantages:
- simpler state transfer API
- interchangeable state transfer mechanism without affect on application
- simplification of client application
Disadvantages:
- we break current API by eliminating getState(byte[]) and setState(byte [])
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators:
http://jira.jboss.com/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa
-
For more information on JIRA, see:
http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira