the instance should not be regenerate again in re registering procedure, if
you can kindly raise a PR to fix this problem, it will be great

Willem Jiang <willem.ji...@gmail.com> 于2019年10月18日周五 上午8:51写道:

> Just off topic finding.
> I can see two replies of Liubao in my mail box.
> @Liubao Could you check you mail box setting if you send out the mail
> twice?
>
> Willem Jiang
>
> Twitter: willemjiang
> Weibo: 姜宁willem
>
> On Thu, Oct 17, 2019 at 9:12 PM Liubao (A) <bao....@huawei.com> wrote:
> >
> > I don’t know why,and the comment is there when opensource. But I agree
> with you reregister using old ID
> > 发件人:Ang Li <liang951...@qq.com>
> > 收件人:dev <dev@servicecomb.apache.org>
> > 时 间:2019-10-17 20:21:08
> > 主 题:[DISCUSSION] Why reset instanceId when re-registing microservice
> >
> > Hi team,
> >
> >
> >
> In&nbsp;org.apache.servicecomb.serviceregistry.task.MicroserviceRegisterTask#doRegister,
> the instanceId is set to "null" when re-registering microservice.&nbsp;
> >
> >
> > Here is a issue [SCB-1489] Microservice instance wouldn't work after we
> shotdown our service center for updating while we had enabled RSA
> authentication between services (issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SCB-1489)
> seems to related to resetting instanceId.
> >
> >
> > As Haishi Yao comment in SCB-1489: If the service reset the instanceId
> but not reset the token, provider will get old consumer instanceId parsed
> by token while the actual instanceId is already updated. I think the
> problem&nbsp;will be solved if application keep the instanceId immutable
> after application starting.
> >
> >
> > Although the issue can alse be solved by resetting token everytime
> resetting instanceId, I think use old instanceId to re-registering service
> is easier to understand and more efficient although there are some reasons
> to reset the instanceId. BTW, I have checked the code in service center and
> find the instanceId is generated as UUID.
> >
> >
> > Anyone have ideas about why resetting the instanceId when re-registering
> service? I have no idea till now.
> >
> >
> > Ang Li
>

Reply via email to