Re: [reSIProcate] upcoming changes to DUM's RegistrationPersistenceManager and ServerRegistration

[Alan Hawrylyshen <alan@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Jun 6, 2005, at 15.04, Adam Roach wrote:

> > I propose refactoring ServerRegistration so we pass a list of  
> > operations (memory owned by DUM) in the  
> > ServerRegistrationHandlers.  The application can inspect the  
> > operations and/or the original request.  accept() would cause the  
> > list of operations to be committed to the database (quick lock/ 
> > unlock), return the current list of registered contacts (with and  
> > without instances), and free the list of operations.  reject()  
> > would free the memory.
>
> That sounds like a good design to me.
>
>
> > We can use the same operations for updates from other cluster  
> > members when we add high availability.
>
> Yep. I like that.

My comments:

    One thing to pay attention to is the lock-lifetime vis  
exceptions. We don't want to open ourselves to a situation where  
throwing an exception results in a lock-state leak.  This is arguably  
a weakness of mixing procedural and OO design in general.  This isn't  
an apple-pie post either -- there have been resource and exception  
safety issues in the past; they are surprisingly easy to introduce.
;-)

Cheers,
Alan


a l a n a t j a s o m i d o t c o m