Avro
  1. Avro
  2. AVRO-324

Avro tools "rpcsend" and "rpcreceive" should order message name and port the same way

    Details

    • Type: Improvement Improvement
    • Status: Closed
    • Priority: Major Major
    • Resolution: Fixed
    • Affects Version/s: None
    • Fix Version/s: 1.3.0
    • Component/s: java
    • Labels:
      None

      Description

      They're reversed.

        Activity

        Hide
        Doug Cutting added a comment -

        We might use URIs here to name endpoints, for example:

        • tcp://0.0.0.0:0/ could be used to start a socket server on a dynamically allocated port
        • http://localhost:5555/ could be used to contact a local HTTP-based server on port 5555

        Command options might be ordered from general to specific, i.e.:

        • rpcsend transport:://host:port protocol messageName parameters
        • rpcreceive transport:://host:port protocol messageName response
        Show
        Doug Cutting added a comment - We might use URIs here to name endpoints, for example: tcp://0.0.0.0:0/ could be used to start a socket server on a dynamically allocated port http://localhost:5555/ could be used to contact a local HTTP-based server on port 5555 Command options might be ordered from general to specific, i.e.: rpcsend transport:://host:port protocol messageName parameters rpcreceive transport:://host:port protocol messageName response
        Hide
        Doug Cutting added a comment -

        Also, the port number from rpcreceive should be easy to get from an invoking script. Currently it's printed to standard error, but I wonder if rather this alone should be printed to standard output, as something like: "port: XXX". Either that or we might specify a file on the command line where the port should be written, e.g.:

        rpcreceive -portFile foo.port transport:://host:port protocol messageName response

        Show
        Doug Cutting added a comment - Also, the port number from rpcreceive should be easy to get from an invoking script. Currently it's printed to standard error, but I wonder if rather this alone should be printed to standard output, as something like: "port: XXX". Either that or we might specify a file on the command line where the port should be written, e.g.: rpcreceive -portFile foo.port transport:://host:port protocol messageName response
        Hide
        Philip Zeyliger added a comment -

        I think URIs would be a good way to encode transports and their options. They're reasonably well-understood, easy to parse, and easy to use.

        Show
        Philip Zeyliger added a comment - I think URIs would be a good way to encode transports and their options. They're reasonably well-understood, easy to parse, and easy to use.
        Hide
        Doug Cutting added a comment -

        This was fixed as a part of AVRO-321.

        Show
        Doug Cutting added a comment - This was fixed as a part of AVRO-321 .

          People

          • Assignee:
            Doug Cutting
            Reporter:
            Jeff Hammerbacher
          • Votes:
            0 Vote for this issue
            Watchers:
            1 Start watching this issue

            Dates

            • Created:
              Updated:
              Resolved:

              Development