Yes, I think this would really make the whole implementation and handling much more compicated. And actually black listing is exactly for these use cases. It gives you control which instance is able to handle what jobs. So you can exclude a specific instance from processing a specific job, in your use case you exclude all but one. This is not blacklisting of event handlers if you're refering to that one.
Carsten 2013/9/3 Ian Boston <[email protected]> > Hi, > I see how it could work, but it seems an odd way of making a queue > work, to actively blacklist a topic queue on certain instances. I > thought black listing was intended for non responsive consumers. > > Is there something inherently wrong with the concept of a JobQueue > provider ? > Is it because it would make the implementation of the JobManager too > complex where providers are not present at activation ? > > Best Regards > Ian > > On 3 September 2013 19:00, Carsten Ziegeler <[email protected]> wrote: > > I think this is beyond queuing - you can use a topology listener for that > > by disabling a topic on all instances but the active one. If the active > one > > goes down, an event is fired on the remaining instances, and another one > > can take over. This will ensure rescheduling of jobs to that instance by > > the job manager. > > So all you have to take care of is managing the blacklist of the job > > consumer manager based on topology events. > > > > Carsten > > > > > > 2013/9/3 Ian Boston <[email protected]> > > > >> Hi, > >> > >> I want to be able to submit jobs, distribute those jobs and have those > >> jobs restart on instance failover in a way not supported by the > >> current jobs queues in the event bundle, without requiring the event > >> bundle to be re-released. > >> > >> eg > >> Run only on the active Sling instance in a active/passive pair and if > >> the active instance changes, then that instance new active instance to > >> run all the jobs, including jobs that were added, but not run on the > >> old active instance. > >> > >> Ian > >> > >> > >> On 3 September 2013 18:00, Carsten Ziegeler <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> > In theory this would be possible, but I guess this would create maybe > >> more > >> > problems - an implementation might not be available (anymore), a > >> > configuration might point to a non existing implementation etc. A lot > >> more > >> > things could go wrong. > >> > > >> > > >> > What's your use case? :) > >> > > >> > Carsten > >> > > >> > > >> > 2013/9/3 Ian Boston <[email protected]> > >> > > >> >> Hi, > >> >> I see that the JobQueues are hard coded into the JobManager. > >> >> > >> >> Would it be possible to make the JobQueue an API so that its could be > >> >> provided by another bundle ? > >> >> > >> >> Best Regards > >> >> Ian > >> >> > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > -- > >> > Carsten Ziegeler > >> > [email protected] > >> > > > > > > > > -- > > Carsten Ziegeler > > [email protected] > -- Carsten Ziegeler [email protected]
