On 9 August 2012 21:31, Rajith Attapattu <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, Aug 9, 2012 at 4:13 PM, Robbie Gemmell <[email protected]> > wrote: > > No, "connecttimeout" being unused isn't intended, but it appears to have > > been that way since 0.6 went out, see: > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/QPID-4051. > > So perhaps a bug ? perhaps we should fix this for the next release ? > > Defintiely a bug, I actually meant to fix it for this release but you can kinda tell from the comments on the JIRA that I went on holiday (<gasp>) and forgot about it :P
> > "qpid.failover_method_timeout" is not intended to be used instead of it > but > > is instead a very recently introduced system property that can be used to > > control a previously hard coded value in an entirely different area of > > code. As someone once said in a commit message "hard coding makes coding > > hard". This is a good example of one of those 'we dont really expect/want > > people to use and so shouldnt bother to confuse them by documenting it' > > system properties I just mentioned in my other email. > > However due to connecttimeout not working (or not used) it appears > this property was somewhat useful to an end user. > But I agree that if this isn't generally useful then better not to > document it. > Instead maybe we should fix connecttimeout. > > Given that connecttimeout has been broken for 3 years before being noticed I wouldn't bother to document this one (which actually does something different, not normally all that useful to a user, particularly if they need to timeout a connect() operation) but instead fix connecttimeout which is documented and only ever mention this if its actually necessary. We have put a connect() timeout in for 0.16 based on a user patch (QPID-4047), albeit it isnt configurable due to QPID-4051 but in this case thats still better than no timeout in the previous releases. > P.S I guess we will have to do some of these minor fixes until we > provide a fully working new JMS client. > The connect timeout seems a useful feature when used with the > singlebroker situation. > Agreed, a connect() timeout could be useful with any connection situation so we should definitely fix it. > Rajith > > > Robbie > > > > > > On 9 August 2012 16:10, Rajith Attapattu <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> While looking up the code to answer a question from a user, I noticed > >> that we don't use "connecttimeout" any where. > >> This property is retrieved using the "getTimeout()" method in > >> AMQBrokerDetails.java > >> > >> However the getTimeout() method (or the property) is not used any > >> where else in the code. > >> Instead it appears we use "qpid.failover_method_timeout" with a > >> default of 120000 > >> (We should also document these system properties in the docs) > >> > >> Is this behaviour correct and as expected ? > >> Could anybody who is familiar with this change/feature shed some light > on > >> this? > >> > >> Regards, > >> > >> Rajith > >> > >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > >> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > >> > >> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > >
