Github user jpeach commented on the pull request:

    https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/359#issuecomment-163500832
  
    Thanks @jrushf1239k. Now that we have a pretty clean commit on this branch, 
I think that it is OK to make any additional changes in new commits.
    
    I think the big thing that I'm concerned about in this patch is the 
ownership model. AFAICT, the ParentRecord object owns a ParentSelectionStrategy 
(I don't see where this is deleted), but the ParentSelectionStrategy is passed 
and actually owns the pointer to its own parent which it deletes in its 
destructor. We should try to avoid parricide.
    
    A better pattern, if you can manage it, is to pass in all the information 
that the ParentSelectionStrategy needs, rather than setting member variables. 
So in the strategy construction, just keep what you need from the ParentRecord 
(probably pointers to the pRecord list). It looks like you started down this 
path in ParentConsistentHash, so maybe you can take that further.
    
    I think you can remove ParentRecord::round_robin because it is implied by 
the strategy. We would just have additional strategies ParentStrictRoundRobin, 
ParentHashRoundRobin and ParentNoRoundRobin. It's fine for them all to live in 
ParentRoundRobin.{c,hh}.
    
    I think you can remove ParentResult::line_number.
    
    ParentRecord::lookup_strategy should be named selection_strategy to match 
ParentSelectionStrategy.
    
    I don't think you need ParentSelectionStrategy::numParents() since it is 
only ever used for assertions. Try to just eliminate that.
    
    I think we can find better names for the ParentSelectionStrategy API. 
lookupParent should be selectParent, since it is making a selection from a 
match. I was going to suggest that recordRetrySuccess should be called 
markParentUp for symmetry, but then I noticed that its implementation is the 
same for both strategies. Can we just remove it?
    
    In email I mentioned removing extApiRecord. I see now that you have 
preserved that from the current code, so don't worry about trying to remove it.
    
    In the original code, ParentRecord had a FindParent() member function. I 
would prefer to keep that rather than having the caller traverse 
ParentRecord::lookup_strategy itself. It just hides the implementation a bit 
more nicely.
    
    Note that FindParent() used to take a ParentConfigParams. Since the lookup 
policy is now spread over the ParentRecord and the the config_params 
structures, it would be cleaner to condense all this into a 
ParentSelectionPolicy object that is passed into FindParent. I think this would 
help you separate the ParentSelectionStrategy from owning a ParentRecord 
pointer too, since state that the strategy looks at would now be passed in.


---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

Reply via email to