Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

irc:1474840800 [2017/05/27 13:44]
irc:1474840800 [2017/05/27 13:44] (current)
Line 1: Line 1:
 +[08:46:29] *** ChanServ sets mode: +o temporalfox
 +
 +[12:17:08] *** ChanServ sets mode: +o temporalfox
 +
 +[12:43:54] *** ChanServ sets mode: +o temporalfox
 +
 +[14:33:33] *** ChanServ sets mode: +o temporalfox
 +
 +[15:42:09] <​Alex____>​ Hello, can anyone help me.  Does code 1 and 2 do exactly same things? 1) vertx.deployVerticle(Verticle.class.getName(),​ new DeploymentOptions().setInstances(8)); ​ 2) for(int i = 0; i < 8; i++) { Verticle verticle = new Verticle(); vertx.deployVerticle(verticle,​ new DeploymentOptions());​ }
 +
 +[15:59:47] *** ChanServ sets mode: +o temporalfox
 +
 +[16:02:38] <​skullcrasher>​ Alex____, afaik a difference might be that 1) will return one deploymentId for all deployed Verticles and 2) can return a deploymentId for every verticle deployed seprateley (if u save it in your loop ofc). So with 2 you can undeploy each verticle on it's own, with 1 only all or none.
 +
 +[16:03:14] <​skullcrasher>​ but maybe someone here can prove me wrong :)
 +
 +[16:05:47] <​Alex____>​ @skullcrasher,​ thank you!
 +
 +[16:39:33] *** ChanServ sets mode: +o temporal_
 +
 +[16:49:17] <​temporal_>​ Alex____ the other difference is that with the 1) you are sure to have 8 different threads (given you have the proper number of corse) and with 2) you will not
 +
 +[16:49:34] <​temporal_>​ with 2 you might get the same thread in two verticle instances
 +
 +[16:52:55] <​Alex____>​ @temporal_ Wow! Thanks, i don't know that. So what is the proper way to deploy multiple instances of verticle using constructor?​
 +
 +[16:53:23] <​temporal_>​ Alex____ ideally we should have something like deploy(Supplier<​Verticle>​)
 +
 +[16:54:37] <​temporal_>​ Alex____ you could use a verticle class that is passed a reference
 +
 +[16:54:53] <​temporal_>​ and put in a static hashmap the verticle with that reference String
 +
 +[16:55:10] <​temporal_>​ that would work although it's a work around
 +
 +[16:57:06] <​Alex____>​ @temporal_, Thank you, I will try that approach.
 +
 +[17:09:06] *** ChanServ sets mode: +o temporalfox
 +
 +[22:27:22] *** ChanServ sets mode: +o temporalfox
 +
 +[22:29:21] *** ChanServ sets mode: +o temporalfox
 +
 +[22:34:59] *** ChanServ sets mode: +o temporal_
 +
 +[23:01:37] *** ChanServ sets mode: +o temporalfox