perfsonar development work

["Jeff W. Boote" <>]

Roman Łapacz wrote:
> Jeff W. Boote napisał(a):
> > > This message handler is a part of pS base so all it's needed to have 
> > > it working is adding its name (LookupInfoRequest) to 
> > > service.properties file in service.ma.message_types property.
> >
> > Is there some reason not to use the LSQuery message type? It is 
> > already well defined for the LS. If you can reuse it, then clients can 
> > reuse most of the same code they use to query an LS for multiple 
> > services to query the single service.
> >
> > I think we should strive to reduce the number of distinct message 
> > types that are in use... (If there is a reason not to use it - I'm not 
> > against creating new needed message types. I would just like to see 
> > re-use whenever possible.)
>
> I thought I would reuse existing message handler (LSQueryRequest) but 
> unfortunately I could not. The implementation did not allow for that. I 
> had to create new one and introduce new type of message.

How is the syntax/semantics different from what you are trying to do?

If the reason is strictly implementation - then perhaps the same messageType 
should be used anyway? (I realize this could cause problems for the Java 
messageHandlerFactory, but I think that is fixable in a very easy way.)

jeff

P.S. I will create an example for the timeType discussion next week. I think 
I've come up with an idea I like better - but I need to think about it some more.