Re: Review Request 31121: Expose NodeTracker::last_topology_change to management so I can determine, from my testing program, exactly how long the router network takes to settle after a topological change.

[Ted Ross <tr...@apache.org>]

-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31121/#review74790
-----------------------------------------------------------



trunk/python/qpid_dispatch/management/qdrouter.json
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/31121/#comment121548>

    This new attribute should not be in the router.node entity because there's no way to access other nodes' timestamps (nor would they be meaningful locally without synchronized clocks).
    
    It would be more appropriate to put this in the router entity.


- Ted Ross


On Feb. 17, 2015, 12:32 p.m., michael goulish wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/31121/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated Feb. 17, 2015, 12:32 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for qpid, Alan Conway and Ted Ross.
> 
> 
> Repository: qpid-dispatch
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> DISPATCH-113 : expose NodeTracker::last_topology_change to management
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   trunk/python/qpid_dispatch/management/qdrouter.json 1659590 
>   trunk/python/qpid_dispatch_internal/router/node.py 1659590 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/31121/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> I have used it from my 'topologist' testing program for a couple hundred iterations with no obvious ill effects.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> michael goulish
> 
>