synapse-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Supun Kamburugamuva <supu...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Generating Names for Anon. Endpoints
Date Wed, 05 May 2010 15:39:23 GMT
On Wed, May 5, 2010 at 8:18 PM, Ruwan Linton <ruwan.linton@gmail.com> wrote:

> Folks,
>
> Please note that there is noway that we can manage or monitor inlined
> endpoints.
>
> Actually even now we can monitor an inline endpoint using JMX, enable
statistics and tracing. Only condition is it should have a name.

If it doesn't have a name and if we enable statistics, statistics are
recorded under the general name AnonymousEndpoint. If we have two of those
statistics are collected under the same name. That means if I send 1 request
to annon epr1 and 2 requests to annon epr 2, 3 requests will be shown under
the AnonymousEndpoint.

Thanks,
Supun..


> Even we enforced names for inlined endpoints, there is noway (at least for
> the moment) that any user can manage/monitor those endpoints, which is
> simply because there is no means of retrieving inlined endpoints.
>
> I am holding my *strong* -1 for enforcing the name for inlined endpoints.
>
> To make the developers life easier we are trying to make the life of the
> user a difficulty.
>
> Please give me a list of *tested* advantages that the user get by enforcing
> a name for the inlined endpoints.
>
> Thanks,
> Ruwan
>
>
> On Wed, May 5, 2010 at 2:43 PM, Hiranya Jayathilaka <hiranya911@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> Hi Supun
>>
>> On Wed, May 5, 2010 at 2:28 PM, Supun Kamburugamuva <supun06@gmail.com>wrote:
>>
>>> I think we all agree that having a meaningful name for any endpoint
>>> (in-line or not) is very important
>>
>>
>> No not really. Most users will be happy with the existing model. AFAIU
>> most users do not bother with endpoint management stuff. In most production
>> systems if an endpoint gets suspended then that is due to a real serious
>> problem in the deployment. So the answer to that is not to use JMX to
>> re-enable the endpoint but to investigate where the problem is.
>>
>>
>>> and is a production best practice.
>>
>>
>> That's correct.
>>
>>
>>> So I'm still not getting why we are not agreeing to force it, because
>>> the disadvantages to the user are greater than the advantages.
>>
>>
>> Is it? IMO this change will be a major hit on the usability and the
>> correctness of the model. Totally outweighs the advantages.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Hiranya
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Supun..
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, May 5, 2010 at 2:23 PM, indika kumara <indika.kuma@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> My point exactly :) We should keep anonymous endpoints around since they
>>>>> are very useful. But the best practice should be to properly name all
>>>>> endpoints.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> Hiranya
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Hiranya ... If you mean that we should avoid the auto generation of the
>>>> names and keeps anonymous endpoints 'as-is'. That is the behavior in early
>>>> days including the last release.  If so... I would like to add something
..
>>>> If the correctness of the operation is critical such as clustering and if
>>>> the user has not specified the name , we should warn or exit.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks
>>>>
>>>> Indika
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Software Engineer, WSO2 Inc
>>> http://wso2.org
>>> supunk.blogspot.com
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Hiranya Jayathilaka
>>
>> Software Engineer;
>> WSO2 Inc.;  http://wso2.org
>> E-mail: hiranya@wso2.com;  Mobile: +94 77 633 3491
>> Blog: http://techfeast-hiranya.blogspot.com
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Ruwan Linton
> Technical Lead & Product Manager; WSO2 ESB; http://wso2.org/esb
> WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.org
> email: ruwan@wso2.com; cell: +94 77 341 3097
> blog: http://ruwansblog.blogspot.com
>



-- 
Software Engineer, WSO2 Inc
http://wso2.org
supunk.blogspot.com

Mime
View raw message