Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Routing: Consider adding to use instance mapping to route message to another host/instance #62

Open
ramonsmits opened this issue Apr 26, 2018 · 1 comment

Comments

@ramonsmits
Copy link
Member

ramonsmits commented Apr 26, 2018

Currently any queue configured for error, audit, servicecontrol or servicecontrol monitoring skips routing. It would be very convenient instance routing would be applied to any of these queues.

  • Customer only has to maintain a single instance mapping file
  • Customer can have round-robin distribution between multiple instance for a queue

Other transports do use routing mapping when sending message like for example sqlt.

Possible behavior:

  • If a instance is specified on the address, use it.
  • If no instance is specified, use the instance resolved from the instance mapping, if no instance is round throw exception that no instance could be resolved indicating to add this to the instance mapping source.

Example:

Customer wants to scale-out a current one machine deployment and now needs specify an instance in any of the API's while the instances are already managed in the instance mapping file.

@ramonsmits ramonsmits changed the title Consider adding to use instance mapping to route message to another host/instance Routing: Consider adding to use instance mapping to route message to another host/instance Jun 10, 2020
@ramonsmits
Copy link
Member Author

Research is needed to understand where the translation from logical to physical can happen might we use the current API's to contain a logical endpoint.

The plugins use the low-level dispatch API's. If we want to map logical to physical this would likely require changes in these plugins.

We could alternatively go for a physical to physical translation.

@ramonsmits ramonsmits added this to the 1.1.0 milestone Jun 10, 2020
@ramonsmits ramonsmits removed this from the 1.1.0 milestone Jun 23, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant