Versions Compared

Old Version 6

changes.mady.by.user Toine Siebelink

Saved on

compared with

New Version 7

changes.mady.by.user kieran mccarthy

Saved on

Key

  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.

...

#IssueNotes Decision
1Type of Interface REST or KafkaREST
  1. easier/cheaper
  2. well documented by OpenAPI
  3. support test stubs (contract testing)

Kafka

  1. more complicated/costly
  2. plethora of topics and messages, not well documented (no standard)
  3. More robust (request persisted until acknowledged)

kieran mccarthy :  Understood REST is more aligned with existing registration interface.  It is however less robust though.  For example if NCMP crashes it would be preferable to just continue by pulling next request from topic.  Will check with design and come back


2ModuleSetId based on Hash no (yet) implemented!

This study seems to assume the hash-based module id is already implemented but it isn't!

kieran mccarthy :  the request it to introduce the hash for this new usecase.  Not assuming it is there already.  Will be costlier but is important for performance to avoid pulling models if they are already known to NCMP.


3Expected Responses

when and what content?

  1. just acknowledge upon receipt
  2. response on completion

4Should CM-Handle state cahnge (ie to locked)  'during' upgrade?Yes but is important to not be locked for long which makes it important to use the hash


Solution Proposals 

Two options to trigger a module set upgrade.  One based on kafka events and one based on REST.  Preference is alternative 1 - the Kafka based solution.

...