This version (2017/05/27 13:44) is a draft.
Approvals: 0/1

[06:22:52] * ChanServ sets mode: +o temporalfox [08:07:43] * ChanServ sets mode: +o purplefox

[08:15:05] <jac0> Is is possible to use a regular JDBC connection within a verticle, if only that verticle is writing to the db?

[08:16:27] <jac0> I'm used to querydsl/jooq along with try-with-resources.

[09:57:01] * ChanServ sets mode: +o temporalfox [10:18:44] <aesteve> hi everyone :) [10:19:45] <aesteve> I just wanted to ask one question since I might have some free time this weekend, pmlopes. Could you tell me if you agree with [10:20:03] <aesteve> or if you think it's an over-complicated API (especially wrapping the HttpServerResponse) [10:24:36] <amr> aesteve: did you find many good quality examples of vertx set ups, [10:26:12] <aesteve> what do you mean by setups ? re. the examples . Here you have the whole list [10:26:50] <aesteve> and here's another one : [10:28:55] <amr> I found the examples in the first repo a bit simple, would be interested in seeing some examples with many verticles, or examples of scaling [10:29:08] <amr> thanks for the last one, will take a look:) [10:30:57] <aesteve> this is kinda hard to write such examples [10:31:36] <aesteve> like scaling really depends on your application, sometimes you'll need 4 instances of a webserver because you think it's the bottleneck of your application, sometimes you'll scale differently [10:32:30] <amr> true [10:32:45] <amr> your vertx-feeds looks good though [10:32:51] <amr> very helpful, thanks :) [10:33:14] <aesteve> for instance in the vertx-feeds example, if I had to scale, I'd keep one instance for the worker verticles (obviously), one instance for the RSSReader (which is just invoked on a periodic basis and doesn't do a lot of stuff) and distribute other instances (available event-loops) to the web stuff [10:34:10] <amr> why only one instance of the worker? [10:34:38] <aesteve> the workers are just creating embedded databases [10:34:38] <aesteve> for the purpose of the example [10:35:23] <aesteve> instantiating more than one instance : 1/ isn't needed . 2/ would lead to create more than one mongo DB for example (which would fail anyway) [10:35:28] <amr> yeah makes sense, there's no reason they'd be the bottleneck either [10:35:34] <amr> oh [12:51:57] <purplefox> cescoffier: was thinking, maybe we should add a link to your “getting started” blog post from the “Get started” section of the docs page? [12:52:03] <purplefox> as it's a very useful article [12:57:46] <msavy> gents, i've hit a small snag with ProxyGen stuff again - i was using a pattern identical to your docs, where you use one proxy to return another (i.e. SomeDatabaseService && MyDatabaseConnection examples on - i've made a code example to demonstrate the issue [12:58:35] <msavy> now, if i change the method ` void createIngestor(String uuid, Handler<AsyncResult<IngestorToPolicyService» resultHandler);` to be static, then it compiles fine - but i need a specific impl in that case (as in your example docs) [13:05:18] <purplefox> msavy: what error do you get? [13:05:27] <msavy> if you scroll down i pasted it as the last item [13:05:37] <msavy> here - [13:09:48] <cescoffier> purplefox: I will add the link. Planning to publish post 2 Monday (configuration and random port for tests) [13:11:15] <purplefox> msavy: I think it needs to be proxygen and vertxgen: [13:14:38] <msavy> purplefox: aha! i'll test that out, and if it works i'll make a PR to change the docs [13:19:01] <msavy> purplefox: woohoo, it worked! [13:23:09] <msavy> purplefox: i had assumed that ProxyGen implied VertxGen [13:28:49] <aesteve> pmlopes: just ping me if you have some time to discuss about SSE :) I should be 'round this afternoon. [14:10:56] <DP2015> Any suggestion on the best way or handling json request from client? [14:50:09] <rajith> purplefox: morning .. I have a pow wow with david around 9, will ping u afterwards to talk on irc [14:50:27] <purplefox> ok [15:02:15] <msavy> purplefox: just got back from lunch, had time to do a bit more testing - all seems to work swimmingly. thanks for the pointer! [15:03:36] <purplefox> msavy: np [15:48:44] <aesteve> happy holiday purplefox ;) [15:59:33] <rajith> purplefox: hey, got a few mins? [16:00:42] <purplefox> hi, how's it going? [16:01:11] <rajith> purplefox: not bad sir… I will have the remaining items all done up when u are back [16:01:33] <purplefox> great, no hurry, 3.1 is due in Q4 2015 [16:01:33] <rajith> purplefox: just to confirm you wanted to drop the flow control stuff for this release right? [16:01:52] <purplefox> sec [16:02:00] <rajith> purplefox: I have up coming vacation in aug and oct … so might as well finish it when I can [16:02:05] <rajith> purplefox: k [16:04:40] <purplefox> do you mean the “fetct” method? [16:04:55] <rajith> purplefox: yea [16:05:39] <rajith> purplefox: if we don't have time to talk through this, we could wait until you are back [16:05:47] <purplefox> i wouldn't worry too much about removing stuff now [16:05:52] <purplefox> we can easily do that later if need be [16:05:59] <rajith> purplefox: ok cool [16:06:41] <rajith> purplefox: I'm also interested in the transport abstraction. Maybe I'll wait until you guys have that discussion at the f2f [16:07:01] <purplefox> cool [16:07:18] <purplefox> we'll make sure all community stuff is discussed on the user or dev groups anyway :) [16:07:25] <rajith> purplefox: there is some interest from our group in doing that … I know Weston was looking at it before but not sure where it went [16:08:24] <purplefox> are you going to be a the vert.x f2f in newcastle ? [16:09:34] <rajith> purplefox: I haven't been asked. I think it's dingham's call :) [16:10:24] <rajith> purplefox: when is it happening? I'm thinking about going on pto from Aug last week to sep 1st week [16:13:17] <purplefox> 21-24 sep [16:15:38] <rajith> purplefox: if you and David think my participation is useful I can come over. It will be useful if we discuss the transport stuff. [16:16:26] <purplefox> i think it would be useful - i'll ask dave [16:16:34] <zerkz> ive implemented a custom authprovider using the vertx interface. I'm a little confused on how to return an AsyncResult<User> for the resultHandler in the authenticate interface [16:16:36] <purplefox> also would be good to say hi :) [16:16:37] <zerkz> anyone have tips? [16:17:15] <purplefox> zerkz: probably the easiest thing to do would be to take a look how the other auth providers do it [16:17:44] <zerkz> ah, good idea, good code example [16:17:49] <zerkz> ill take a look at JDBCAuthImpl [16:19:50] <rajith> purplefox: cool, let me know when you are back from vacation [16:20:01] <rajith> purplefox: hope u have a wonderful time! [16:20:12] <purplefox> thanks! [20:25:46] <newoga> I find that it is tough to read because it each log entry gets broken into two lines.. [20:25:57] <newoga> For example: [20:25:58] <newoga> Jul 17, 2015 2:22:23 PM io.vertx.codegen.CodeGenProcessor lambda$process$48 [20:25:59] <newoga> INFO: Generated model com.emikra.vertx.request.RequestFactory: resources/vertx-request-js/request_factory.js [20:26:20] <newoga> the first line isn[unknown:rsquo]t terribly useful [20:32:58] <newoga> I see that the format for logging is here:, but not sure if this can be overridden for specific modules/mvn projects like codegen, it[unknown:rsquo]d be nice if it could be dumped to one line and follow the mvn logging conventions with [LOG LEVEL] [20:33:16] <newoga> tools that parse mvn output to ignore lovels would also work in that case [23:18:44] * ChanServ sets mode: +o temporalfox