{"action":"created","issue":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/wamp-proto/wamp-proto/issues/103","repository_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/wamp-proto/wamp-proto","labels_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/wamp-proto/wamp-proto/issues/103/labels{/name}","comments_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/wamp-proto/wamp-proto/issues/103/comments","events_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/wamp-proto/wamp-proto/issues/103/events","html_url":"https://github.com/wamp-proto/wamp-proto/issues/103","id":47227234,"number":103,"title":"Sharded registrations / parallel calls","user":{"login":"mbonneau","id":748287,"avatar_url":"https://avatars0.githubusercontent.com/u/748287?v=3","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/mbonneau","html_url":"https://github.com/mbonneau","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/mbonneau/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/mbonneau/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/mbonneau/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/mbonneau/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/mbonneau/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/mbonneau/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/mbonneau/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/mbonneau/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/mbonneau/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"labels":[{"id":82070220,"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/wamp-proto/wamp-proto/labels/Advanced%20Profile","name":"Advanced Profile","color":"eb6420","default":false},{"id":253471471,"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/wamp-proto/wamp-proto/labels/Needs%20discussion","name":"Needs discussion","color":"006b75","default":false},{"id":265788669,"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/wamp-proto/wamp-proto/labels/RFC","name":"RFC","color":"0052cc","default":false}],"state":"open","locked":false,"assignee":null,"assignees":[],"milestone":null,"comments":20,"created_at":"2014-10-30T02:33:05Z","updated_at":"2017-03-20T18:20:14Z","closed_at":null,"body":"How should multiple registrations of the same procedure name be handled by the Dealer?\n\nIn the basic profile, the <code>wamp.error.procedure_already_exists</code> error message is mentioned as a response to an attempt to register and already existing procedure. From this I assume that, by default, a procedure can only have one registration.\n\nIn the advanced profile, there is discussion about partitioned RPCs and different methods for calling them, but there is no option to tell the dealer that it should allow multiple registrations for a particular procedure.\n\nI have been implementing a feature in [Thruway](https://github.com/voryx/Thruway) that requires multiple registrations and have been using the option <code>REGISTER.Options.thruway_multiregister</code> , which is not great. I am looking for guidance on the proper way to do this. If there is not one, I would suggest <code>REGISTER.Options.allow_multiple_registrations|bool := true</code> to allow multiple registrations on an individual procedure name and <code>REGISTER.Options.allow_runon|list</code> which would specify which strategies to allow for calling - example: <code>[\"any\", \"all\", \"partition\"]</code>. (Restriction of <code>CALL.Options.runon</code> would be desirable as different applications may not be appropriate for all of the options.)\n"},"comment":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/wamp-proto/wamp-proto/issues/comments/287851723","html_url":"https://github.com/wamp-proto/wamp-proto/issues/103#issuecomment-287851723","issue_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/wamp-proto/wamp-proto/issues/103","id":287851723,"user":{"login":"oberstet","id":233340,"avatar_url":"https://avatars0.githubusercontent.com/u/233340?v=3","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/oberstet","html_url":"https://github.com/oberstet","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/oberstet/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/oberstet/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/oberstet/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/oberstet/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/oberstet/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/oberstet/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/oberstet/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/oberstet/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/oberstet/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"created_at":"2017-03-20T18:20:14Z","updated_at":"2017-03-20T18:20:14Z","body":"@meejah \r\n\r\n> \"sharded\" vs \"shared\" is too close, IMO. So of the choices, \"partitioned\" sounds best to me.\r\n\r\nOk, so lets roll with \"partitioned\" for whatever we come up with a feature that routes to callees sitting on data shards and the like. Note that this would be different from \"shared regs with invoke=all\" .. which I tried to sketch out here https://github.com/wamp-proto/wamp-proto/issues/271\r\n\r\n> \"sticky\" option to shared registrations\r\n\r\nYes, I'm +1:\r\n\r\n* https://github.com/wamp-proto/wamp-proto/issues/188\r\n* https://github.com/crossbario/crossbar/issues/965"}}
{"actor":{"display_login":"oberstet"}}