-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 23
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
Announces with same name in reconnect #227
Comments
One of use cases we should think about is a client that crashes and reconnects. |
As an individual, The crash (or disconnect) use case is compelling for "the most recent one wins". Are there applications where that policy would break something? |
I agree with Alan that "most recent" overwrites any earlier ones is best path forward. |
+1 on most recent overwrites. this is what we do atleast today and it works fine to the amount we have tested. |
Going with the most recent |
WFM |
I Dont think existing subscriptions needs to be terminated. Let say the case where, A publisher disconnects due to getting into an elevator for a moment and sends announce on reconnect, sending out protocol messages to cancel the subscriptions on the second announce is too noisy. |
As an individual: I don't think we need to force unsubscribe everyone if the relay successfully resubscribes to the new ANNOUNCE. I think Luke is suggesting that the relay unsubscribe on the session that issued the old ANNOUNCE? |
Yeah exactly. The upstream subscription is reissued to the new connection, but any downstream subscriptions can be maintained by updating a lookup table. I can elaborate if this isn't clear; the glue between "upstream" and "downstream" subscriptions can be confusing. |
Got it. Makes sense. Agree all the downstream subscriptions can stay intact for the announced namespace |
Closed by #525 |
When the relays received an ANNOUNCE with exact same name as previous ANNOUNCE, what happens?
Options seem to be replace previous ANNOUNCE data or return an error.
This is related to #225 and #204
Discussion to follow in thread
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: