Amila Suriarachchi wrote:
On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 7:23 PM, Jaliya Ekanayake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote:
Hi Amila,
>you mean if it is a resumed sequence RM has to drop messages upto
the number it has gone?
>I think the better option is to give some API to Client app to get
the number of messages has send. if crashed sequence has send 99
messages then this is a huge duplicate.
Yes, this is something that we can do to improve.
But, what is the requirement for the crashed client application to
send the sequence from the beginning always?
Again it is upto the client application to decide its crash-recovery
behavior. (I am sorry if I mentioned this usecase earlier. I did not
mean to use it as the only option)
If it can recover and start sending the next messages we don't need
to worry about it.
If it decide to use the very basic approach of starting the sequence
again, then still the it will work.
I like the simple approach. Otherwise, we are injecting lot of RM
related logic to the application.
I am not saying what you told was impossible. yes certainly we can do this.
so the best option would be to allow two ways and let users to choose
when they use.
1. send a resume message and send all messages
2. examine the send messages and send messages from that point.
-1. The application should never have to tell the RM system "Yes really do
send those *reliable* messages now that I'm back up".
Sanjiva.
--
Sanjiva Weerawarana, Ph.D.
Founder & Director; Lanka Software Foundation; http://www.opensource.lk/
Founder, Chairman & CEO; WSO2, Inc.; http://www.wso2.com/
Member; Apache Software Foundation; http://www.apache.org/
Visiting Lecturer; University of Moratuwa; http://www.cse.mrt.ac.lk/
Blog: http://sanjiva.weerawarana.org/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
