Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-ace-dev-archive@www.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-ace-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 2ED0D106D8 for ; Mon, 5 Aug 2013 07:24:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 23952 invoked by uid 500); 5 Aug 2013 07:24:19 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-ace-dev-archive@ace.apache.org Received: (qmail 22336 invoked by uid 500); 5 Aug 2013 07:24:10 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@ace.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@ace.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@ace.apache.org Received: (qmail 22119 invoked by uid 99); 5 Aug 2013 07:24:07 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 05 Aug 2013 07:24:07 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.7 required=5.0 tests=RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of bdekruijff@gmail.com designates 209.85.128.49 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.128.49] (HELO mail-qe0-f49.google.com) (209.85.128.49) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 05 Aug 2013 07:24:01 +0000 Received: by mail-qe0-f49.google.com with SMTP id 1so1527243qec.36 for ; Mon, 05 Aug 2013 00:23:40 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=4m8s2OrMgTYrZWlIDwsznfClWn94/+6gGABaZMwjIj4=; b=z9xumzYd5Si3trX9aj55xgnMO+yz+E7mDJYIuaEqP7+Li+rsqfklX7dDS1tuTPH+lF E1XQ2fuANMzRQlHrdWGlAGM/mlGmA/Fh+QYPok0s5ymRQqG1Ud7K9CckJ0kVW+TfjYNe evOpMk2afwkyeFIDGzTD1Onp9lsNCacFlIDWzIlHmzQvWq07qRgecuNVXMLU7ItAbHM8 ErPfcKjJKqUxxntxO44wrAr6P3G3lyJnVhLKM/ldyu+D433jtXwj3zor5q0Ds3B736nS MEegbVxFiDv7YRDdSeYH5VqRDhchJFiXTatHVlRWrlKpE3ozA5boMrgL5sz1wWVobzok JAlg== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.49.74.227 with SMTP id x3mr24319861qev.29.1375687420601; Mon, 05 Aug 2013 00:23:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.49.87.41 with HTTP; Mon, 5 Aug 2013 00:23:40 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Mon, 5 Aug 2013 09:23:40 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Analysis for updating the MA From: Bram de Kruijff To: dev@ace.apache.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org Hi Marcel, On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 3:48 PM, Marcel Offermans wrote: > Hello devs, > > On the wiki I created a document that provides an analysis of how we could design an update mechanism for the management agent, as described in ACE-342 [2]. I would love to hear your feedback on this! > Just my 2 cents; Although I am sure solution A will work, my preference would be to go for solution B for reasons of simplicity and efficiency. Simplicity because, why have two transport mechanisms if you can have one? Obviously we can and, as you suggest, must make an effort to keep the implementations aligned. Still I feel 1 is better then 2 :) Efficiency because, as you state, a second mechanism requires a second HTTP call. Leveraging keep-alive (that is what you mean with HTTP pipelining?) reduces TCP/IP overhead so that is a good idea, but that has several consequence. First, this requires the agent update to be on the same schedule as the regular check for updates (which I think that is good anyway as it limits waking up devices/connections). Second, we can not guarantee that keep-alive works in all environment (firewalls/proxies). Third, when using keep-alive we must ensure that connections are being closed from the target side in a timely fashion to prevent running out of connection slots on the server fast. grz, Bram > Greetings, Marcel > > [1] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/ACE/Analysis+and+Design+for+updating+the+Management+Agent > [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ACE-342