It looks like Eric and I have reached a consensus on how to handle his last objection, and this is ready for additional reviewers to take a look.
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/7590/ Thanks, Doug On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 2:33 PM, Eric Windisch <e...@cloudscaling.com>wrote: > > > If a consumer is trying to subscribe to a worker pool but the underlying > implementation for the messaging system does not support those semantics, > we should fail loudly and explicitly instead of configuring the consumer > using other semantics that may result in subtle bugs or data corruption. > > If we were doing that right now with the ZeroMQ driver, we'd be raising > some ugly exceptions up without any benefit. It only consumes the > '<service>.<host>' topics. Fanout and round-robin of direct exchanges > (bare topics without a dot-character) are handled by the *sender* and are > thus not consumed, which I realize is 180-degrees from how this is handled > in AMQP. > > My suggestion is that for static matchmakers, on the registration of a > consumer, we do a host lookup in the matchmaker to see if that host has > been pre-registered. If it is not in the map/lookup, then we raise an ugly > Exception. > > Regards, > Eric Windisch > >
_______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack Post to : openstack@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
