Given that this change affects the management schema and what is effectively the primary key for bridges/links, this will obviously affect the Java broker too. (If checked in as is it would no doubt immediately break the java build).
It's not that I personally disagree with the design decisions, but any change like this should probably be discussed and agreed widely before work is embarked upon... or else the person working on it should make the changes across *both* codebases. Cheers, Rob On 19 January 2012 15:22, Kenneth Giusti <[email protected]> wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://reviews.apache.org/r/3546/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > Review request for qpid, Alan Conway, Gordon Sim, michael goulish, and Ted > Ross. > > > Summary > ------- > > This patch modifies the way the broker's Link and Bridge objects are > identified and managed. Specifically: > > 1) both Bridge and Links are now identified by explict names assigned by > management, rather than destination host/port info. > - names beginning with the prefix "qpid." are reserved for qpidd > internal use. > - for backward compatibility, if no name is assigned on creation, the > broker will generate a name based on UUID > 2) the corresponding QMF objects have been updated accordingly, with the > additions of: > - the QMF Link object has been updated to provide a reference to the > corresponding Connection > - the QMF Link object has been modified to allow the > host/port/connectionRef to change on failover > - the QMF Bridge object has been modified to allow the Channel > identifier to change (allowing Bridges to be reassigned to different links > in the future) > 3) Links/Bridges may now be created/deleted via the QMF Broker's generic > "create" and "delete" methods > 4) Some consolidation of the Link/Bridge creation APIs, specifically: > - Link/Bridges are created via calls to the LinkRegistry's "declare()" > methods > - Link/Bridges are removed by calling their corresponding "destroy()" > methods > > More importantly, the above changes make it possible to create multiple > Links between the same two brokers. This can be done by creating Links to > the same destinations with different names. This is a change from the > existing behavior, which uses the destination host/port as the unique Link > identifier. > > > This addresses bug qpid-3767. > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/qpid-3767 > > > Diffs > ----- > > /trunk/qpid/cpp/src/qpid/broker/Bridge.h 1233125 > /trunk/qpid/cpp/src/qpid/broker/Bridge.cpp 1233125 > /trunk/qpid/cpp/src/qpid/broker/Broker.cpp 1233125 > /trunk/qpid/cpp/src/qpid/broker/Connection.cpp 1233125 > /trunk/qpid/cpp/src/qpid/broker/Link.h 1233125 > /trunk/qpid/cpp/src/qpid/broker/Link.cpp 1233125 > /trunk/qpid/cpp/src/qpid/broker/LinkRegistry.h 1233125 > /trunk/qpid/cpp/src/qpid/broker/LinkRegistry.cpp 1233125 > /trunk/qpid/cpp/src/tests/federation.py 1233125 > /trunk/qpid/specs/management-schema.xml 1233125 > > Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/3546/diff > > > Testing > ------- > > This patch fails to pass some of the cluster tests - I'm investigating > this now. All non-cluster federation tests where passing (prior to my > latest rebase). > > Work remains, but I wanted to get this patch out for discussion before > going much farther. > > > Thanks, > > Kenneth > >
