-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 42
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
Fix session affinity management (stickiness) in wildfly-http-client #108
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Changes from 1 commit
6c2c255
75162be
782f815
fddb756
75b0292
a359156
c0b9a42
5c637e4
9e059aa
c4d7336
6252596
88560f4
2fdb50f
d2383e7
891ea3a
a4b8e61
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
|
@@ -20,12 +20,18 @@ | |
/* | ||
* Versioning enum for HttpHandler implementations. | ||
* | ||
* TODO: due to the way EENamespaceInteroperability.createInteroperabilityHandler(HttpHandler...) works, | ||
* the original protocol versions JAVAEE_PROTOCOL_VERSION and JAKARTA_PROTOCOL_VERSION need to share | ||
* the same handler instance, so it was not possible to match protocol handler indexes to protocol versions | ||
* in a 1-to-1 manner. In order to avoid a confusing protocol version to handler version mismatch, they share | ||
* the handler installed at index 2. | ||
* TODO: integrate this with the Protocol class in a nice way. | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. How can this be integrated if the idea was to decouple the protocol version from the handlers version? There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. I have renamed the class. These are good questions. And what if there are Protocol version changes which don't correspond to handler version changes. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. I just lost a well-crafted 200 word response to this (with one misplaced click which killed my text :-()
I'm going to have a shot at creating an implementation of this; well, on second thought, it might be better to have a short chat about it first. |
||
* | ||
* @author Richard Achmatowicz | ||
*/ | ||
public enum Version { | ||
VERSION_1(1), | ||
EARLIEST(2), | ||
VERSION_1(2), | ||
VERSION_2(2), | ||
LATEST(3) | ||
; | ||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yes, I see your point. It is the drawback of introducting the handler version after protocol version is already at number 2. I'm still open to suggestions if you would do it differently.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'm thinking about it...