The problem is message failures in this scenario. On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 12:12 PM, Mike Nichols <[email protected]>wrote:
> > Considering I often publicly relate my lack of insight into > multithreading issues here is a question :) : > Would it heavy handed (and cumbersome) to persist something about the > message (like the id) so when it arrives and is handled it can be > checked upon Receive to know what action to take, defaulting to a Null > action if it has been dealt with? Are we dealing with how to > concurrently handle the state of a message? Maybe persist a state > object for the message before sending? > > On Jan 26, 9:56 am, Ayende Rahien <[email protected]> wrote: > > That is really annoying to me, but I am not sure what we can do to > > successfully resolve this issue. > > > > On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 11:46 AM, Ayende Rahien <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > It is more than that, actually, we handle some things in the peek > directly > > > (to support move to sub queue.I think that this is going to change, so > we > > > only ever deal with things in a transaction after a recieve > > > > > On Sun, Jan 25, 2009 at 1:23 AM, Ayende Rahien <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > >> How would you do that, and how would this help? > > > > >> the actual problem is that we can get into a situation where we > process a > > >> message on several threads on the same time. > > >> It just happened to be the case that this is not something that we > > >> actually do (because receive will take care of that), but it seems > like an > > >> aweful lot of waste to do it in this fashion. > > > > >> On Sun, Jan 25, 2009 at 1:20 AM, Mike Nichols < > [email protected]>wrote: > > > > >>> Putting the Thread Id in the message itself to be evaluated onpeek? > > > > >>> On Jan 24, 11:06 pm, Ayende Rahien <[email protected]> wrote: > > >>> > The threading model for the bus is done by spawning multiple Begin > Peek > > >>> > calls. > > >>> > That is causing a problem because when a message arrives, we get > > >>> notified > > >>> > for the _same_ message on all threads. > > >>> > I am not sure how to resolve this issue. > > >>> > Any ideas? > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Rhino Tools Dev" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rhino-tools-dev?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
