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

fix client reconnect offline provider. #3159

Closed
wants to merge 0 commits into from

Conversation

zonghaishang
Copy link
Member

What is the purpose of the change

fix issue: #3158

Brief changelog

XXXXX

Verifying this change

XXXXX

Follow this checklist to help us incorporate your contribution quickly and easily:

  • Make sure there is a GITHUB_issue field for the change (usually before you start working on it). Trivial changes like typos do not require a GITHUB issue. Your pull request should address just this issue, without pulling in other changes - one PR resolves one issue.
  • Format the pull request title like [Dubbo-XXX] Fix UnknownException when host config not exist #XXX. Each commit in the pull request should have a meaningful subject line and body.
  • Write a pull request description that is detailed enough to understand what the pull request does, how, and why.
  • Write necessary unit-test to verify your logic correction, more mock a little better when cross module dependency exist. If the new feature or significant change is committed, please remember to add integration-test in test module.
  • Run mvn clean install -DskipTests=false & mvn clean test-compile failsafe:integration-test to make sure unit-test and integration-test pass.
  • If this contribution is large, please follow the Software Donation Guide.

@codecov-io
Copy link

codecov-io commented Jan 7, 2019

Codecov Report

Merging #3159 into master will decrease coverage by 0.01%.
The diff coverage is n/a.

Impacted file tree graph

@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##             master    #3159      +/-   ##
============================================
- Coverage     63.78%   63.77%   -0.02%     
  Complexity       75       75              
============================================
  Files           661      661              
  Lines         28612    28612              
  Branches       4823     4823              
============================================
- Hits          18251    18246       -5     
+ Misses         8153     8151       -2     
- Partials       2208     2215       +7
Impacted Files Coverage Δ Complexity Δ
...e/dubbo/remoting/transport/netty/NettyChannel.java 57.64% <0%> (-4.71%) 0% <0%> (ø)
...bo/rpc/cluster/support/FailbackClusterInvoker.java 67.21% <0%> (-3.28%) 0% <0%> (ø)
...pache/dubbo/remoting/transport/AbstractServer.java 44.79% <0%> (-3.13%) 0% <0%> (ø)
...he/dubbo/registry/multicast/MulticastRegistry.java 64.93% <0%> (-1.74%) 0% <0%> (ø)
...dubbo/remoting/exchange/support/DefaultFuture.java 73.64% <0%> (-1.36%) 0% <0%> (ø)
...pache/dubbo/registry/support/AbstractRegistry.java 79.61% <0%> (-1.16%) 0% <0%> (ø)
.../exchange/support/header/HeaderExchangeServer.java 60.37% <0%> (-0.95%) 0% <0%> (ø)
...apache/dubbo/rpc/protocol/dubbo/DubboProtocol.java 66.24% <0%> (+1.26%) 0% <0%> (ø) ⬇️
...he/dubbo/remoting/transport/netty/NettyServer.java 69.64% <0%> (+5.35%) 0% <0%> (ø) ⬇️
...che/dubbo/remoting/transport/mina/MinaChannel.java 53.94% <0%> (+10.52%) 0% <0%> (ø) ⬇️

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update d27fb1f...d27fb1f. Read the comment docs.

@CrazyHZM
Copy link
Member

CrazyHZM commented Jan 7, 2019

If there is any problem with the direct use reconnectExecutorFuture
reconnectExecutorFuture .cancel(true)

@zonghaishang
Copy link
Member Author

zonghaishang commented Jan 7, 2019

If there is any problem with the direct use reconnectExecutorFuture
reconnectExecutorFuture .cancel(true)

@CrazyHZM This is defensive fault tolerance, calling reconnectExecutorFuture .cancel(true) will have no side effects.

@CrazyHZM
Copy link
Member

CrazyHZM commented Jan 7, 2019

If there is any problem with the direct use reconnectExecutorFuture
reconnectExecutorFuture .cancel(true)

@CrazyHZM This is defensive fault tolerance, calling reconnectExecutorFuture .cancel(true) will have no side effects.

thank you.

@khanimteyaz khanimteyaz mentioned this pull request Jan 8, 2019
6 tasks
@chickenlj
Copy link
Contributor

LGTM

@zonghaishang
Copy link
Member Author

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.

5 participants