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

Make client work when addresses configured via different interface than members #14104

Merged
merged 2 commits into from Feb 8, 2019

Conversation

sancar
Copy link
Contributor

@sancar sancar commented Nov 12, 2018

Clients and members were forced to configure use interface when
adding a member address to config.

This prd relaxes rules. As long as hostnames are resolved to same ip
when dns lookup made on the client side following setups are allowed.

  1. Member hostname <-> client different hostname
  2. Member ip <-> client different hostname
  3. Member hostname <-> client ip

@sancar sancar added this to the 3.12 milestone Nov 12, 2018
@sancar sancar self-assigned this Nov 12, 2018
@sancar sancar changed the title [WIP] Fix/mixed address config setups/master [POC] Fix/mixed address config setups/master Nov 12, 2018
@sancar sancar force-pushed the fix/mixedAddressConfigSetups/master branch from e7e72a8 to 0045241 Compare November 12, 2018 13:43
@@ -79,6 +81,7 @@
this.connectionStrategy = connectionStrategy;
this.clusterConnectionExecutor = createSingleThreadExecutorService(client);
this.shuffleMemberList = client.getProperties().getBoolean(SHUFFLE_MEMBER_LIST);
this.userMemberListForDiscovery = client.getProperties().getBoolean(USE_MEMBER_LIST_FOR_DISCOVERY);
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

wording userMemberListForDiscovery --> useMemberListForDiscovery

@sancar sancar force-pushed the fix/mixedAddressConfigSetups/master branch 2 times, most recently from 0593cb9 to 61fc76b Compare January 28, 2019 11:45
@sancar sancar changed the title [POC] Fix/mixed address config setups/master Fix/mixed address config setups/master Jan 28, 2019
@sancar
Copy link
Contributor Author

sancar commented Jan 28, 2019

run-lab-run

@mmedenjak mmedenjak added the Source: Internal PR or issue was opened by an employee label Jan 29, 2019
@sancar sancar changed the title Fix/mixed address config setups/master Make client work when addresses configured via different interface than members Jan 29, 2019
@sancar sancar changed the title Make client work when addresses configured via different interface than members [WIP] Make client work when addresses configured via different interface than members Feb 6, 2019
@sancar sancar changed the title [WIP] Make client work when addresses configured via different interface than members Make client work when addresses configured via different interface than members Feb 8, 2019
@sancar sancar force-pushed the fix/mixedAddressConfigSetups/master branch from aa10093 to 3ac1190 Compare February 8, 2019 12:52
sancar added 2 commits February 8, 2019 16:11
…an members

Clients and members were forced to configure use interface when
adding a member address to config.

This prd relaxes rules. As long as hostnames are resolved to same ip
when dns lookup made on the client side following setups are allowed.

1. Member hostname <-> client different hostname
2. Member ip       <-> client different hostname
3. Member hostname <-> client ip
1. This way, we will remove the need a new object creation on hot path.
2. We will have more consistent behaviour. Even if address resolution
changes on jvm level, client will not be affected.
@sancar sancar deleted the fix/mixedAddressConfigSetups/master branch February 8, 2019 13:54
sancar pushed a commit to sancar/hazelcast that referenced this pull request Feb 12, 2019
To keep the behaviour same, reverted the related line.
Added a severe log to make user aware of the problem.

follow up to hazelcast#14104
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Source: Internal PR or issue was opened by an employee Team: Client
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

4 participants