Thanks for the updated explanation, that certainly makes sense.
On Mon, Jul 29, 2019 at 10:47 AM Jordan Zimmerman <
jor...@jordanzimmerman.com> wrote:
> Sure - makes sense Cameron..
>
> When CURATOR-533 was written, each ConnectionStateListener created was
> mapped a new CircuitBreaker instance.
Sure - makes sense Cameron..
When CURATOR-533 was written, each ConnectionStateListener created was mapped a
new CircuitBreaker instance. In hindsight, this doesn't make sense. Only a
single, shared CircuitBreaker is needed. Here's the email that the Elastic
engineer sent to me originally that
