Skip to content
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

config: add type_url to DeltaDiscoveryResponse #6957

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
May 15, 2019

Conversation

fredlas
Copy link
Contributor

@fredlas fredlas commented May 15, 2019

Risk Level: none, adding unused proto field

#4991

Signed-off-by: Fred Douglas <fredlas@google.com>
Copy link
Member

@htuch htuch left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks!


// Type URL for resources. Identifies the xDS API when muxing over ADS.
// Must be consistent with the type_url in the Any within 'resources' if 'resources' is non-empty.
string type_url = 4;
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think this is fine (and will merge), because this is consistent with our previous approach. Do you think (forward looking) there is a case for mixed types in a single DeltaDiscoveryResponse? I.e. the ability to try and deliver an atomic-ish update?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Hmm. Possibly. I think you would need it structured as "here is a series of updates, apply them in this order", although at that point you're just kind of saving on some overhead from multiple gRPC messages. To do a more seriously atomic thing, there would need to be some serious changes in the Envoy xDS consumers to support that.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Although I guess the "batching" approach would give you the benefit of allowing the Envoy to return an all-or-nothing (N)ACK for the batch, which might simplify things for the server.

@htuch htuch merged commit 154cdcb into envoyproxy:master May 15, 2019
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants