Meetings2011-03-17 » History » Version 8
J. Wienke, 03/17/2011 02:59 PM
1 | 1 | J. Wienke | h1. Meetings2011-03-17 |
---|---|---|---|
2 | 1 | J. Wienke | |
3 | 1 | J. Wienke | Topics: |
4 | 1 | J. Wienke | * Michael ;) |
5 | 1 | J. Wienke | * Jan ;) |
6 | 1 | J. Wienke | * URIs... |
7 | 2 | J. Wienke | |
8 | 2 | J. Wienke | h2. Message Fragmentation |
9 | 2 | J. Wienke | |
10 | 2 | J. Wienke | * Only c++ right now |
11 | 2 | J. Wienke | ** missing: |
12 | 4 | J. Wienke | *** Python |
13 | 4 | J. Wienke | *** Java |
14 | 2 | J. Wienke | *** Common LISP |
15 | 2 | J. Wienke | * blocks of size 100k |
16 | 2 | J. Wienke | * recombination missing |
17 | 2 | J. Wienke | * Notification contains total number of blocks and number of current block |
18 | 2 | J. Wienke | * spread UNSAFE_MESS does not guarantee sequencing of messages -> recombination with ordering and waiting required in input port |
19 | 2 | J. Wienke | * What to do with missing messages (e.g. directly when starting a subscription there could be only the last half of a message received) |
20 | 1 | J. Wienke | ** simple strategy: Timeout for finalization of a message to dispatch |
21 | 1 | J. Wienke | * Configuration of block size as a simple hack in current class... |
22 | 4 | J. Wienke | |
23 | 4 | J. Wienke | h2. Jan's Question Collection |
24 | 4 | J. Wienke | |
25 | 4 | J. Wienke | h3. Names |
26 | 4 | J. Wienke | |
27 | 4 | J. Wienke | * Event Payload: User data in an event |
28 | 4 | J. Wienke | * Wire Type: data type of serialized representation, e.g. bytes, has a language mapping |
29 | 4 | J. Wienke | * Wire Schema: schema of serialized data, descriptor, IDL? |
30 | 4 | J. Wienke | ** dependent of wire type |
31 | 5 | J. Wienke | * Converter: |
32 | 5 | J. Wienke | ** Currently only for event payload |
33 | 5 | J. Wienke | ** serializes payload to wire type according to wire schema |
34 | 5 | J. Wienke | ** and vice versa |
35 | 6 | J. Wienke | |
36 | 6 | J. Wienke | h3. Why Ports Bidirectional? |
37 | 6 | J. Wienke | |
38 | 6 | J. Wienke | * Sebastian: one implementation is enough based on common ground |
39 | 6 | J. Wienke | * Jan: Current scheme restricts usage cardinalities |
40 | 6 | J. Wienke | * Still could be useful in future |
41 | 6 | J. Wienke | |
42 | 7 | J. Wienke | h3. Should (Spread) Ports Know Who Is Receiving Data |
43 | 6 | J. Wienke | |
44 | 6 | J. Wienke | * Spread: group members |
45 | 6 | J. Wienke | * no sending would be required if there is no receiver |
46 | 6 | J. Wienke | * Sebastian: not important as usecase |
47 | 6 | J. Wienke | * Naming: requires a more global strategy to provide kind of membership information |
48 | 1 | J. Wienke | |
49 | 8 | J. Wienke | h3. How Much Functionality and Dynamics in Subscriptions? |
50 | 7 | J. Wienke | |
51 | 7 | J. Wienke | * updates of filters etc. |
52 | 7 | J. Wienke | * which changes of a subscription can or have to trigger naming events? |
53 | 1 | J. Wienke | * First iteration: subscriptions are immutable |
54 | 8 | J. Wienke | |
55 | 8 | J. Wienke | h3. |