[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-3675?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12907642#action_12907642
 ] 

Simon Laws commented on TUSCANY-3675:
-------------------------------------

The runes that seem to work at the moment rely on passing properties into the 
factory.

            Properties properties = new Properties();
            properties.setProperty("bind", "192.168.0.2:14828");
            nodeFactory = NodeFactory.newInstance(properties); 

I'll go with this while I'm investigating how it all hangs together. 

> domain registry URI not parsed into properties and hence don't configure 
> Hazelcast registry 
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: TUSCANY-3675
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-3675
>             Project: Tuscany
>          Issue Type: Sub-task
>          Components: Java SCA Core Runtime
>    Affects Versions: Java-SCA-2.0-M5
>         Environment: All
>            Reporter: Simon Laws
>
> There is currently the concept of the domainRegistryURI that can have 
> properties.e.g. 
> nodeFactory.createNode(URI.create("tuscany:default?bind=192.168.0.2:14820"), 
> "../domain/distributed-calculator/contribution-add/target/classes");
> Where "tuscany:default?bind=192.168.0.2:14820" mean 
> tuscany - use the Tuscany default domain mechanism? depends what domain 
> registry is loaded
> default - the default domain
> bind=192.168.0.2:14820 - registry specific configuration. In this case 
> telling hazelcast to listen on the specified address
> Regardless of how we finally choose to represent domanRegistryURI in relation 
> to domainURI this currently doesn't seem to be working. Debugging through the 
> many layers involved the hazelcast registry configures itself from the 
> "poperties" extension and the information from the domainRegistryURI aren't 
> put in there. 
> Even if they were put in there this seems unsatisfactory because the 
> properties are factory level/extension point items and I assume will be 
> shared by nodes and hence should contain node specific configuration. 

-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.

Reply via email to