On 24 January 2023 07:54:23 CET, Ondrej Zajicek <santiago@crfreenet.org> wrote:
On Tue, Jan 24, 2023 at 07:44:47AM +0100, Maria Matejka wrote:
Hello
I thing that the most elegant way how to handle renaming of objects during reconfiguration is to allow multiple names / aliases. There could be be more symbols pointing to given object (but the object points back to its primary name).
Reconfiguration to rename objects could be done in two steps - in the first step, the user would add alias for the new name. In the second step, the old name would be removed.
I think this keeps the problem with protocol restart when the renaming of "base name" is done.
The primary problem of renaming is matching existing objects with definitions from the new config. If that can be done (by finding existing objects through aliases), it is just a reconfiguration of object property, like any other. I.e. implementation problem instead of conceptual problem.
Well… yes, it is more of an implementation problem, yet in v3 I considered this more of an invariant. It can be done, though, I'm just kind of lazy to check all the places where I put the protocol / table name like memory pool names or IO loop names… and implement renaming of these. Maria