I'm happy to take back up the conversation of why have this at all. I proposed this feature after doing some personal research into etcd for a talk about a year and a half ago. I found that one of the interesting features of etcd was that you could have clients enable ephemeral data without sticky sessions to the server. This is a popular feature in etcd and I can understand the desire to have a more lightweight way to create such nodes.
I suppose I will kick it back to you, what are you afraid of vis a vis usage? On Mon, Aug 29, 2016 at 10:56 AM, Flavio Junqueira <f...@apache.org> wrote: > I've left some time back a request to have it somewhere so that I could > leave some specific review comments and asked a question about the API > changes. > > I'd like to understand at a high level what we are trying to achieve. For > example, the description of the jira mentions that the goal is to enable > nodes to expire without relying on sessions. Does it imply that this is for > applications that will rely purely on local sessions? Should we provide a > way of not having sessions at all, global or local? > > My sense is that this is a great feature and I'm happy to see a patch and > discussion, but I feel that we need to discuss it further so that we > understand how this is going to be used. At least, I'd like to understand > it better. > > -Flavio > > > On 29 Aug 2016, at 13:11, Jordan Zimmerman <jor...@jordanzimmerman.com> > wrote: > > > > Per Benjamin: "i'm fine letting it go in as is" > > > >> On Aug 26, 2016, at 8:18 PM, Patrick Hunt <ph...@apache.org> wrote: > >> > >> Thanks Camille! It's fine with me, although notice that Flavio has been > >> providing feedback and has some concerns. Also there is a pending issue > >> (testing) identified by Ben most recently and afaict not yet resolved. > >> > >> Patrick > >> > >> On Fri, Aug 26, 2016 at 1:49 PM, Camille Fournier <cami...@apache.org> > >> wrote: > >> > >>> OK I'm the slacker that proposed us doing this in the first place and > I'm > >>> THRILLED that you have done it Jordan, thank you so much. > >>> Pat, I can review and merge, unless you are concerned with > interference on > >>> other issues. LMK. > >>> > >>> C > >>> > >>> On Fri, Aug 26, 2016 at 10:42 AM, Patrick Hunt <ph...@apache.org> > wrote: > >>> > >>>> Hi Jordan. This looks like a great new feature, but I'm afraid I'm > >>> focused > >>>> on other things atm. I don't have much time after work/home > currently, as > >>>> such I've been focused on other priorities; 1) supporting existing > >>>> users/issues in 3.4, and 2) trying to get 3.5 branch to production > ready. > >>>> There are already a number of features queued up in that branch (3.5) > >>> which > >>>> we need to get out to folks. Thanks for your patience. > >>>> > >>>> Regards, > >>>> > >>>> Patrick > >>>> > >>>> On Thu, Aug 25, 2016 at 9:00 PM, Jordan Zimmerman < > >>>> jor...@jordanzimmerman.com> wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> So - what’s a guy got to do to get this merged? > >>>>> > >>>>> -Jordan > >>>>> > >>>>>> On Aug 18, 2016, at 11:27 AM, Andrew Purtell <apurt...@apache.org> > >>>>> wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Please > >>>>>> This looks really handy for implementing transient data structures. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 5:53 AM, Jordan Zimmerman < > >>>>>> jor...@jordanzimmerman.com> wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> Any chance of getting https://issues.apache.org/ > >>>>> jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-2169 > >>>>>>> merged? It has: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> * A patch that’s been reviewed > >>>>>>> * 7 Votes > >>>>>>> * 15 Watchers > >>>>>>> * Will help ZooKeeper compete against etcd/consul > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> -Jordan > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> -- > >>>>>> Best regards, > >>>>>> > >>>>>> - Andy > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet > >>>> Hein > >>>>>> (via Tom White) > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >>> > > > >
