Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

irc:1465768800 [2017/05/27 13:44]
irc:1465768800 [2017/05/27 13:44] (current)
Line 1: Line 1:
 +[03:14:53] <​woorea>​ hi
 +
 +[03:15:53] <​woorea>​ what is the best way to send a websocket message to users connected in a verticle deployed in a "​remote"​ node of the cluster?
 +
 +[03:16:26] <​woorea>​ the textHandlerId are available for as localConsumer
 +
 +[03:36:57] <​inspiron>​ hi
 +
 +[03:37:03] <​inspiron>​ can I use angular 1.5 with this?
 +
 +[03:37:39] <​inspiron>​ I saw this https://​github.com/​knalli/​angular-vertxbus but it just said Angular 1.2, 1.3, 1.4
 +
 +[08:25:34] <amr> is there a difference between Future.future(),​ f.setHandler(),​ and then f.complete()ing
 +
 +[08:25:44] <amr> than just calling hander.handle(future.succeededfuture()) ?
 +
 +[08:29:04] <amr> seems nothing really
 +
 +[10:43:52] <​temporalfox>​ succeeded future is a all in one method
 +
 +[10:44:00] <​temporalfox>​ in the future we could provide an optimized succeededFuture
 +
 +[10:44:05] <​temporalfox>​ with only the handler field
 +
 +[10:44:11] <​temporalfox>​ not sure it would be useful though :-)
 +
 +[12:11:50] <amr> I'm just wondering if there'​s a need to setHandler at all, and if I can/should explicitly invoke handler.handle() ​ in my callbacks
 +
 +[12:16:19] <​Sticky>​ while there may or may not be a difference at the moment, I believe doing f.complete() allows for completion as an async action where completion handlers are called at some point but not nessaserily NOW, where as hander.handle is obviously an explicit call
 +
 +[12:17:57] <amr> yea, that's what I figured,i think I'll keep ok doing .setHandler for now
 +
 +[12:18:01] <amr> thanks
 +
 +[12:26:17] *** ChanServ sets mode: +o temporalfox
 +
 +[12:38:58] <​AlexLehm>​ temporalfox:​ apparently the localhost issue depends on whether localhost in present in the hosts file in Windows, my home machine has that (in windows7) while another doesn'​t (windows7 as well)
 +
 +[12:39:01] <​AlexLehm>​ wasn't aware of that
 +
 +[12:42:00] <​AlexLehm>​ also the dns may resolve localhost.mydomain,​ where it would work again
 +
 +[12:42:02] *** ChanServ sets mode: +o temporal_
 +
 +[14:32:15] *** ChanServ sets mode: +o temporalfox
 +
 +[14:56:35] *** ChanServ sets mode: +o temporal_
 +
 +[16:59:21] <​joem86>​ Sorry if this is obvious, but if I'm running on a dual-core machine, and deploy 2 standard verticles, does that imply each verticle is running on a different event loop (i.e., different cores)?
 +
 +[17:02:21] <​cescoffier>​ joem86 : yes they will runs in different event loop
 +
 +[17:04:00] <​joem86>​ That's great. Simplifies scaling quite a bit :-)
 +
 +[22:00:43] <​burrsutter>​ what is the Vert.x 3 way to address [unknown:​ldquo]vertx runmod mymod -ha[unknown:​rdquo]? ​ I am looking for the 3.x way to launch my verticles with -ha
 +
 +[22:33:59] <​AlexLehm>​ I think if you create a fatjar, you can use -ha
 +
 +[22:52:09] <​gastaldi>​ burrsutter, I am working on the WildFly Swarm Vert.x fraction. It is 80% complete now
 +
 +[22:52:26] <​burrsutter>​ gastaldi: you rock!!!! :-)
 +
 +[22:52:34] <​burrsutter>​ first class citizen on the eventbus?
 +
 +[22:52:41] <​gastaldi>​ exactly, with hazelcast
 +
 +[22:52:56] <​burrsutter>​ mix in some Camel fraction as pub/sub on the eventbus? :-)
 +
 +[22:53:05] <​gastaldi>​ just having some issues while having a Message Driven Bean consuming the bus
 +
 +[22:53:14] <​gastaldi>​ yeah, why not? :)
 +
 +[22:53:51] <​gastaldi>​ I pinged Jesper Pedersen for some help with this, which I believe it is a WildFly bug
 +
 +[22:54:22] <​gastaldi>​ I have learned more about JCA in the past weeks than in all my previous lives :)
 +
 +[22:57:08] <​gastaldi>​ gtg, see you tomorrow