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

[03:14:53] <woorea> hi

[03:15:53] <woorea> what is the best way to send a websocket message to users connected in a verticle deployed in a “remote” node of the cluster?

[03:16:26] <woorea> the textHandlerId are available for as localConsumer

[03:36:57] <inspiron> hi

[03:37:03] <inspiron> can I use angular 1.5 with this?

[03:37:39] <inspiron> I saw this but it just said Angular 1.2, 1.3, 1.4

[08:25:34] <amr> is there a difference between Future.future(), f.setHandler(), and then f.complete()ing

[08:25:44] <amr> than just calling hander.handle(future.succeededfuture()) ?

[08:29:04] <amr> seems nothing really

[10:43:52] <temporalfox> succeeded future is a all in one method

[10:44:00] <temporalfox> in the future we could provide an optimized succeededFuture

[10:44:05] <temporalfox> with only the handler field

[10:44:11] <temporalfox> not sure it would be useful though :-)

[12:11:50] <amr> I'm just wondering if there's a need to setHandler at all, and if I can/should explicitly invoke handler.handle() in my callbacks

[12:16:19] <Sticky> while there may or may not be a difference at the moment, I believe doing f.complete() allows for completion as an async action where completion handlers are called at some point but not nessaserily NOW, where as hander.handle is obviously an explicit call

[12:17:57] <amr> yea, that's what I figured,i think I'll keep ok doing .setHandler for now

[12:18:01] <amr> thanks

[12:26:17] * ChanServ sets mode: +o temporalfox [12:38:58] <AlexLehm> temporalfox: apparently the localhost issue depends on whether localhost in present in the hosts file in Windows, my home machine has that (in windows7) while another doesn't (windows7 as well) [12:39:01] <AlexLehm> wasn't aware of that [12:42:00] <AlexLehm> also the dns may resolve localhost.mydomain, where it would work again [12:42:02] * ChanServ sets mode: +o temporal_

[14:32:15] * ChanServ sets mode: +o temporalfox [14:56:35] * ChanServ sets mode: +o temporal_

[16:59:21] <joem86> Sorry if this is obvious, but if I'm running on a dual-core machine, and deploy 2 standard verticles, does that imply each verticle is running on a different event loop (i.e., different cores)?

[17:02:21] <cescoffier> joem86 : yes they will runs in different event loop

[17:04:00] <joem86> That's great. Simplifies scaling quite a bit :-)

[22:00:43] <burrsutter> what is the Vert.x 3 way to address [unknown:ldquo]vertx runmod mymod -ha[unknown:rdquo]? I am looking for the 3.x way to launch my verticles with -ha

[22:33:59] <AlexLehm> I think if you create a fatjar, you can use -ha

[22:52:09] <gastaldi> burrsutter, I am working on the WildFly Swarm Vert.x fraction. It is 80% complete now

[22:52:26] <burrsutter> gastaldi: you rock!!!! :-)

[22:52:34] <burrsutter> first class citizen on the eventbus?

[22:52:41] <gastaldi> exactly, with hazelcast

[22:52:56] <burrsutter> mix in some Camel fraction as pub/sub on the eventbus? :-)

[22:53:05] <gastaldi> just having some issues while having a Message Driven Bean consuming the bus

[22:53:14] <gastaldi> yeah, why not? :)

[22:53:51] <gastaldi> I pinged Jesper Pedersen for some help with this, which I believe it is a WildFly bug

[22:54:22] <gastaldi> I have learned more about JCA in the past weeks than in all my previous lives :)

[22:57:08] <gastaldi> gtg, see you tomorrow