Re: Saga,TCC overhead

2018-10-31 Thread wjm wjm
async is not enough, better to be reactive. 赵俊 于2018年10月31日周三 下午5:07写道: > Hi, Willem > > I think make the last invocation async is limitation for performance tuning > As block grpc invoking also use async way internal, only blocking in > futureTask.get(). > > > > > > On Oct 30, 2018, at 4:51

Re: Saga,TCC overhead

2018-10-31 Thread 赵俊
We can write a simple demo to prove reactive or original netty can improve throughout using omega/alpha architecture > On Nov 1, 2018, at 8:29 AM, Willem Jiang wrote: > > I thinking to use actor to do the reactive work, but it looks like we > could make alpha more simple by implement some

Re: Saga,TCC overhead

2018-10-31 Thread Willem Jiang
+1 to use the POC show us the fact :) Now I'm thinking to let Omega more smart[1] by doing the timeout monitor itself to reduce the complexity of Alpha. In this way the Alpha just need to store the message and response the request from Omega. [1]https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SCB-1000

Re: Saga,TCC overhead

2018-10-31 Thread Willem Jiang
I thinking to use actor to do the reactive work, but it looks like we could make alpha more simple by implement some logic on the Omega side, such as the timeout function. Willem Jiang Twitter: willemjiang Weibo: 姜宁willem On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 1:57 AM wjm wjm wrote: > > async is not enough,

Re: Saga,TCC overhead

2018-10-31 Thread Zheng Feng
+1. I think we had some implementation codes before by using the Executors. @Willem Jiang can you recall why we move the timeout handle to the alpha server ? is there any particular reason ? I think maybe the following 1) the omega fails to send the cancel message when timeout happens due to the

Re: Saga,TCC overhead

2018-10-31 Thread 赵俊
Hi, Willem I think make the last invocation async is limitation for performance tuning As block grpc invoking also use async way internal, only blocking in futureTask.get(). > On Oct 30, 2018, at 4:51 PM, Willem Jiang wrote: > > Thanks for feedback, > I just used one participator to show

Re: [Discuss][JavaChassis] about customization of vertx org.apache.servicecomb.transport.rest.vertx.RestBodyHandler

2018-10-31 Thread yhs0092
Hi, one of the JavaChassis exception wrapped in RestBodyHandler is added by me. I will try to remove the JavaChassis exceptions in RestBodyHandler and see whether it can works well. Yours sincerely Yao Haishi yhs0...@163.com On 10/31/2018 09:00,wjm wjm wrote: currently we customized

Re: [Discuss][JavaChassis] about customization of vertx org.apache.servicecomb.transport.rest.vertx.RestBodyHandler

2018-10-31 Thread Willem Jiang
+1 to move these code to the vertx which is best way for servicecomb and vertx. Willem Jiang Twitter: willemjiang Weibo: 姜宁willem On Wed, Oct 31, 2018 at 9:00 AM wjm wjm wrote: > > currently we > customized org.apache.servicecomb.transport.rest.vertx.RestBodyHandler > 1.disable upload feature