[infinispan-dev] [jgroups-dev] Shouldn't Event.GET_PHYSICAL_ADDRESS return a collection PhysicalAddress instances?

[Galder Zamarreno]

On 12/01/2009 09:41 AM, Bela Ban wrote:
>
>
> Brian Stansberry wrote:
>> On 11/29/2009 06:40 AM, Bela Ban wrote:
>>> This feature has been put on the backburner, I might not even implement
>>> it. If I do, then in 3.0, which requires changes anyway.
>>>
>>> I don't know who's using this event currently, are you guys prepared to
>>> change your code if I made this change ?

Yes, we are but it might be wise to accomodate that for the future since 
we have an interface called Transport that currently defines:
Address getPhysicalAddress();

Where Address is an abstraction of JGroups' Address.

So, to make it future proof, it should say:
Address[] getPhysicalAddresses();

Currently, it would only return one but in the future it would allow us 
to return more than one.


>>>
>>
>> AS 6 will use it, as information on the address + port of cluster
>> members is part of the public API of the HAPartition framework. My
>> understanding was this already exists in JGroups 2.8.
>>
>> The AS can adapt to changes in this, as it's not part of any release yet.
>>
>> JBC 3.2.1 uses it with buddy replication when JGroups 2.8 is integrated,
>> to support not choosing a buddy on the same physical machine.
>
> I'll leave the GET_PHYSICAL_ADDR even as is for now, it will always
> return the physical address associated with the logical one. Associating
> multiple physical addresses will be done in 2.9 or 3.0, or maybe put on
> the backburner altogether.
>
> Should I decide to implement this feature, I can still create a
> GET_PHYSICAL_ADDRS (plural) event.


>
>

-- 
Galder Zamarreño
Sr. Software Engineer
Infinispan, JBoss Cache