Re: about the connection with afb-deamon

[José Bollo <jose.bollo@xxxxxxx>]

On Tue, 21 Aug 2018 06:02:03 +0000
<I37546_CHIN@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Hi Jose
> 
> Thank you for your reply.
> 
> Yes, we also tested the multi-connection and found it works well.
> We are very glad to consider other solutions if it is better.
> 
> In fact, we're considering cases that each event listener has its own
> instance. In that way, we think we need different connection to
> identify the listener.(using the "closure") If one connection could
> also do this, I think we can accept this.

Hi ChenWei,

If the idea is to manage several and different event subscriptions then
it is not possible with afb_ws_client_connect_wsj1. Subscriptions are
linked to connections.

Best regards
José

> 
> Thanks/BR
> ChenWei
> -----Original Message-----
> From: José Bollo [mailto:jose.bollo@xxxxxxx] 
> Sent: Monday, August 20, 2018 6:54 PM
> To: I37546 Chin I
> Cc: josé bollo; Fulup Ar Foll; Loïc Collignon [ IoT.bzh ];
> automotive-discussions@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; I25461 Momiyama
> Yoshito Subject: Re:  about the connection with
> afb-deamon
> 
> 2018-08-10 10:15 GMT+02:00  <I37546_CHIN@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
> > Hi Jose  
> 
> Hi ChenWei,
> 
> > I have a question about connection with afb-deamon at APP side.
> > Is it possible that creating 2 or more connections(for e.g., by
> > afb_ws_client_connect_wsj1()) with same port/tokenID in one APP(I
> > mean one process)?  
> 
> I have never tried to do that since your question. So I tried and it
> works. But I guess that you already reached that conclusion.
> 
> > We have cases that APIs are called for different functions at same
> > time. I'd like to know if the reply from binder will be sent to the
> > right requester when we do this.  
> 
> Be aware that although opening many sockets works, it is not the
> prefered way to use libafbwsc. The underlying protocol allows
> interleaving of queries and responses and the the library already
> takes care of that feature. Then opening onlmy one socket should be
> enough even to handle several concurrent requests.
> 
> Nevertheless, I don't know your exact problem so I can not tell what
> is the best solution. Anyway both solutions work.
> 
> Best regards
> José
> 
> >
> > If there are any troubles with this, we will try to keep one
> > connection.
> >
> > Thanks/BR
> > ChenWei
> >  

_______________________________________________
automotive-discussions mailing list
automotive-discussions@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/automotive-discussions