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

[WIP] Add Unix control socket and remove ephemeral nodes #223

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from
Closed

[WIP] Add Unix control socket and remove ephemeral nodes #223

wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

ghjm
Copy link
Contributor

@ghjm ghjm commented May 15, 2020

This pull request does a number of things:

  • Add a Unix domain socket server that runs in the context of a node.
  • Change the one-shot CLI operations (ping, send, status) to be socket clients instead of Receptor nodes.
  • Do away with the concept of ephemeral nodes; all nodes are assumed to be long-lived and none are reaped.
  • Add reply traffic routing to the controller class instead of expecting users to do it in their implementation. This does away with the recv method and replaces it with a callback.
  • Change the default port numbers for rnp to 7323, rnps to 7324, and the Prometheus status to 7325. This is simply to put the default services on a less commonly-used port number than 8888.
  • Remove the go method from the ReceptorConfig object and instead have it pass back the name of the selected entrypoint. This allows the config module not to import entrypoints and thereby avoids a circular import through controller.
  • Restructures the CLI to reflect the new reality. --node-id and --data-dir are now properties of node rather than default. Also changes --server_disable to --no-listener to better reflect what the option actually does.

See ansible/receptor#208

@ghjm ghjm requested a review from matburt May 15, 2020 01:03
@j00bar
Copy link
Collaborator

j00bar commented May 15, 2020

All that is old becomes new.

@ghjm
Copy link
Contributor Author

ghjm commented Mar 18, 2021

This is no longer a thing. We rewrote the whole thing in Go instead of merging this.

@ghjm ghjm closed this Mar 18, 2021
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