[MAGNOLIA-1214] Activation only goes to 1 subscriber Created: 15/Nov/06  Updated: 13/Dec/06  Resolved: 01/Dec/06

Status: Closed
Project: Magnolia
Component/s: activation
Affects Version/s: 3.0 RC4
Fix Version/s: None

Type: Bug Priority: Major
Reporter: Art Peel Assignee: Sameer Charles
Resolution: Won't Fix Votes: 3
Labels: None
Remaining Estimate: Not Specified
Time Spent: Not Specified
Original Estimate: Not Specified
Environment:

tomcat 5 on Windows XP Pro.


Attachments: Text File SimpleSyndicator.java.patch    
Template:
Acceptance criteria:
Empty
Task DoD:
[ ]* Doc/release notes changes? Comment present?
[ ]* Downstream builds green?
[ ]* Solution information and context easily available?
[ ]* Tests
[ ]* FixVersion filled and not yet released
[ ]  Architecture Decision Record (ADR)
Bug DoR:
[ ]* Steps to reproduce, expected, and actual results filled
[ ]* Affected version filled
Date of First Response:

 Description   

Through the config page, make sure there are two or more subscribers.
Add a new page to the website and activate it.
The new page will be sent to only 1 of the subscribers because SimpleSyndicator only asks for 1.

Here is a patch for that:

Index: SimpleSyndicator.java
===================================================================
— SimpleSyndicator.java (revision 7481)
+++ SimpleSyndicator.java (working copy)
@@ -20,6 +20,7 @@
import java.net.URL;
import java.net.URLConnection;
import java.io.*;
+import java.util.Enumeration;

import org.apache.commons.lang.StringUtils;
import org.slf4j.Logger;
@@ -47,9 +48,12 @@

  • @throws ExchangeException
    */
    public synchronized void activate(ActivationContent activationContent) throws ExchangeException {
  • Subscriber si = Subscriber.getSubscriber();
  • if (si.isActive()) {
  • activate(si, activationContent);
    + Enumeration subscribers = Subscriber.getList();
    + while(subscribers.hasMoreElements())
    Unknown macro: {+ Subscriber si = (Subscriber)subscribers.nextElement();+ if (si.isActive()) { + activate(si, activationContent); + } }

    }



 Comments   
Comment by Anthony Ogier [ 30/Nov/06 ]

That patch worked for me.
I think that Bug should be placed as Critical ...

Comment by Boris Kraft [ 01/Dec/06 ]

Its a feature, not a bug.

Comment by Anthony Ogier [ 01/Dec/06 ]

I'm sorry, but the feature was released by Magnolia Inc. on commit number 7281 and 7283 by "philipp" but is simply don't working at the moment... and there is just that little patch to apply to get the multi-subscribers feature !
So I don't really understand what's the problem exactly. Did you planned to support that feature later, and don't want to release it now ? Or did you planed to support it only in EE ? Or to don't support it ?
And last question, is there a place where we can find the features planned and don't planned for each release of Magnolia, the goal of each release ?
Thanks Boris,
Anthony

Comment by Sameer Charles [ 01/Dec/06 ]

The problem with the multi subscriber activation is that its not easy to handle failover / transactions / incremental updates.
You are right that it was a part of community edition but you also know that there was no way to check the status if one of the
subscriber failed to receive content or if a new subscriber is added its not possible to send content only to this new subscriber .

In future we plan to implement better publishing control and that's one of the reason that it will be a part of enterprise edition and community
edition will support single subscriber but in a more robust manner. Perhaps in future there will be some edition to it but we do not know at the moment.

I know we should have communicated this better.

Comment by Capitaine Harold [ 01/Dec/06 ]

Hi Sameer,

In my company, they have asked me to work on this feature.
I'm currently developing this new features for a customer who needs to have an author instance that is not always connected to the public instance.
More over the author instance have to publish to several public instances.

So I have already thinking about a way to do it. Is there anyone in magnolia that has already thinking about that?

It would be interesting to share our point of views as I'm already working on it.
More over my company agrees to give this feature to the community.

Regards.

Comment by Sameer Charles [ 01/Dec/06 ]

since its pluggable you can implement better syndication as a module.

We do not have final decisions / specification what we will do for future enterprise edition, initially we wanted to go in a directiion
of an implementation of ICE protocol (internet content exchange) but its only one of the possibilities and ICE
is one of the most complicated protocol to implement if full featured.

Its great that your company agreed to contribute your work. I will recommend you to start this as a module so you are independent
of the changes in current simple exchange impl.
Also it would be nice if you can post feature set and possible implementation what you plan to do so we can comment on that.

Comment by Capitaine Harold [ 13/Dec/06 ]

Hi Sameer,

I've read the ICE specification 2.0, and it seems to be a good way to build the asynchronous communication system.

So I've searched on internet and I've found only one implementation for the specification of ICE 2.0 called TwICE.
Look at this adress to know more about this:
http://twice.sourceforge.net/

Do you know another implementations? because TwICE is not really well documented but it seems to be really powerful.

Regards,

CAPITAINE Harold

Comment by Capitaine Harold [ 13/Dec/06 ]

Back,

I forgot to ask if you have an idea about another standard more recent compare to ICE that has been drafted 6 years ago.

Regards,

CAPITAINE Harold

Generated at Mon Feb 12 03:24:45 CET 2024 using Jira 9.4.2#940002-sha1:46d1a51de284217efdcb32434eab47a99af2938b.