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

Push to backend needs a sanity check before performing #1540

Open
sudheesh001 opened this issue Sep 26, 2017 · 2 comments
Open

Push to backend needs a sanity check before performing #1540

sudheesh001 opened this issue Sep 26, 2017 · 2 comments

Comments

@sudheesh001
Copy link
Member

  • Issue type: Feature request / Enhancement

So this proposal is broken into separate parts which need to be implemented 1 after the other for this to be completed.

  1. Improve the response from the hello.json to take a value from config called accept-push-messages: true. If this flag is set to be true, publish the space available in the backend in the response to hello.json
  2. Caretaker threads currently fail to push via the push.json api to the backend servers (main peer) either when the disk runs out space or when the servers are down. Performing a hello.json check and finding out disk space before pushing the messages seems to be a good option. This will also ensure that if the server is down at any point, only a failed socket error is thrown, instead of failed message push stack traces.

Some thought experiments:

Can we use a new flag in config like player: junior|senior above to be published to the main backend peer to register the IP address of the peer in peers.json. A local instance running on someones PC could fetch these tables of registered network nodes periodically and push to them in round robin fashion or if a server denies a push for some reason?

@mariobehling
Copy link
Member

Yes, we had a discussions about a similar implementation earlier. Sounds like it can work well for me.

@singhpratyush
Copy link
Member

This is dependent on #1460.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants