> On May 2, 2015, 10:29 a.m., Rafael Schloming wrote: > > proton-c/src/transport/transport.c, line 1110 > > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/33758/diff/1/?file=947291#file947291line1110> > > > > This shouldn't close at all, pn_do_error will send a close frame if > > necessary. This call is mutating the local top-half endpoint state which > > makes no sense here.
Thanks very much! I yanked that. - michael ----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/33758/#review82315 ----------------------------------------------------------- On May 1, 2015, 5:34 p.m., michael goulish wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://reviews.apache.org/r/33758/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated May 1, 2015, 5:34 p.m.) > > > Review request for qpid, Kenneth Giusti and Ted Ross. > > > Repository: qpid-proton-git > > > Description > ------- > > PROTON-842 -- channels and sessions > > > Diffs > ----- > > proton-c/src/engine/engine-internal.h e5ec602 > proton-c/src/engine/engine.c 5e05cbc > proton-c/src/framing/framing.h 9650979 > proton-c/src/transport/transport.c 62d4742 > > Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/33758/diff/ > > > Testing > ------- > > tested with modified simple_send.py and reactor.py > and qdrouterd. > > my script has 1 qpidd broker, 2 routers, and 200 simple_senderer. > > Each simple_sender makes 200 links over a single connection, to router B. > These become link-routes through router A to the broker. > > the purpose of this diff is to get proton code to > ------------------------------------------------------- > 1. not cause router to crash when channels go above 2^15 > 2. do something reasonable in this case, so that application level has a > chance of doing something reasonable. > > > I am not doing handles for links yet -- I want to get review for this first, > get this done, and then do same thing there. I expect those changes will be > identical. > > Also please note -- I did NOT try to quit using the top bit of channel number > as a flag. Just advertising a lower number, trying to do something > reasonable wrt local and remote max channels, and trying to honor what the > other side says. > > > Thanks, > > michael goulish > >
