From dev-return-779-archive-asf-public=cust-asf.ponee.io@zipkin.apache.org Sun May 26 22:39:58 2019 Return-Path: X-Original-To: archive-asf-public@cust-asf.ponee.io Delivered-To: archive-asf-public@cust-asf.ponee.io Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [207.244.88.153]) by mx-eu-01.ponee.io (Postfix) with SMTP id A0B5B18062B for ; Mon, 27 May 2019 00:39:58 +0200 (CEST) Received: (qmail 51408 invoked by uid 500); 26 May 2019 22:39:57 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@zipkin.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@zipkin.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@zipkin.apache.org Received: (qmail 51397 invoked by uid 99); 26 May 2019 22:39:57 -0000 Received: from ec2-52-202-80-70.compute-1.amazonaws.com (HELO gitbox.apache.org) (52.202.80.70) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sun, 26 May 2019 22:39:57 +0000 From: GitBox To: dev@zipkin.apache.org Subject: [GitHub] [incubator-zipkin-brave] jeqo commented on issue #904: Messaging adapter Message-ID: <155891039259.21282.272252190154911406.gitbox@gitbox.apache.org> Date: Sun, 26 May 2019 22:39:52 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit jeqo commented on issue #904: Messaging adapter URL: https://github.com/apache/incubator-zipkin-brave/pull/904#issuecomment-496037141 @llinder I'm wondering if the comments on `cleanPropagation` still holds after considering [this idea from pow-wow](https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=113709067): > One idea is that we use only idempotent header formats. meaning that there are no headers that need to be read before written. ex lower b3 single format My understanding of idempotency in this case is that we "don't care" about cleaning context carrier, but just override value if already exist. If this is correct, then we should not be a `clearPropagation`; or at least not as part of the Parser API. For instance, I know that for JMS we actually *need* to clear message properties before updating value, otherwise it fails with read-only properties. In this case we would have to clear on injector setter, I think. I'd like your feedback on: - Does this interpretation of idempotency make sense to everyone? - Should we constraint to B3 single header format moving forward? ---------------------------------------------------------------- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: users@infra.apache.org With regards, Apache Git Services --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@zipkin.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@zipkin.apache.org