Ahh... Now it all makes sense. I saw all the codec related code in the repo
but donšt see how they can be used. This should work for the client side and
I like the message abstraction since we do that now anyways. I guess the
encode transform calls the filters from last to first and the decode from
first to last? What will the decode side look like? Is the codec API
designed as a replacement to the filter / handleRead/Write methods of
implementing custom protocols? How do you think it will affect performance
and memory use?
Grizzly 2.0 is getting very interesting and I canšt wait to see the next set
of changes!
Thanks again
Bo
On 5/19/09 3:01 PM, "Oleksiy Stashok" <Oleksiy.Stashok_at_Sun.COM> wrote:
> Hi Bo,
>
> looks like you're looking for Codec API to be supported by FilterChain
> (FilterChain.getCodec()).
> We have that API, but it's not implemented for FilterChain. I'll complete the
> implementation nearest time.
>
> It will work like:
>
> Buffer buffer = filterChain.getCodec().getEncoder().transform(message);
> connection.getStreamWriter().writeBuffer(buffer);
>
> This way, tranform will sequentially call each Filter, which implement
> FilterCodec interface, to encode the message.
>
> Does this sound good for you?
>
> WBR,
> Alexey.
>
>>
>> I have a question about the design of client side code, or any non IO event
>> driven code, using Grizzly 2.0. I understand that processing is triggered on
>> IO events and each filter in the filter chain will handle the event
>> accordingly. This works well in a server-side request-response protocol
>> model. The protocol parser can just read and write to the StreamReader and
>> StreamWriters from the FilterChainContext without having knowledge of
>> previous filters on the chain.
>>
>> However, what I don't see is how to do the same on the client side or if the
>> server needs to send unsolicited messages to the client. In these cases,
>> there are no IO events to trigger the filter chain but the protocol message
>> still needs to be handled by the filters before going out the wire. I
>> understand for SSLFilter I can just wrap the SSLStreamWriter around
>> StreamWriter from the TCPConnection but then my protocol parser code will
>> need to know about the previous filters on the chain and their
>> implementation. If I change the filters in the chain I will also need to
>> change the wrappings of StreamWriters and StreamReaders.
>>
>> Is there a easier way to do this? I envision a two-way filter chain where I
>> just write to "protocol" side of the chain and previous filters will process
>> the write request before sending it out the wire.
>>
>> Thanks again
>> Bo
>>
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe_at_grizzly.dev.java.net
>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help_at_grizzly.dev.java.net
>>
>
>