Aidan Skinner wrote:
On Tue, Nov 11, 2008 at 8:24 PM, Robert Greig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
2008/11/10 Aidan Skinner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
The MINA issue is analogous to the "fast producer" issue we have known
about for a long time. Martin, I thought this had been fixed ages ago
but I can't find the Jira. Do you know the status of that issue?
This is basically what I want to address with the changes discussed at
http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/qpid/Broker+job+queue+limits
Ah, ok I hadn't been aware of this. Was there an existing Jira for
this that I have now duplicated?
I think there are several that address different aspects of the
fundamental problem. You can run across it in different ways, one bit
feels like a rope, one bit like a tree etc. Jira's a bit of a state
right now though I can't find any of them, so I wouldn't worry about
it. ;)
It won't make M4 sadly.
Yes, it's not a two minute fix. Possibly merits a release when it is
done since I imagine that a number of users will want this, and we
will look bad if people are doing bake offs.
Yeah, I'm hoping to put together a more concrete plan of attack in the
near future for this and maybe get it out this year. We'll have to see
how big and invasive a change it is though, I have a feeling it's
going to slippery.
I have to think it would be a lot easier to do this with credit on 0-10.
I assume the extra
pain trying to do it on 0-9 is merited by it been needed for a
deployment. If not this would
be a lot easier to do using 0-10 - I have been looking at extending our
flow control capabilities
on the C++ broker, and it is a lot easier given you can revoke credit,
so you don't have to try
push back on threads which get ugly fast. In 0-10 is comes down to
determining policies on
which to do it (harder part) and then revoking or limiting credit based
on the policy.
Carl.
