CVS update: JGroups/src/org/jgroups/protocols FD_SOCK.java
"Bela Ban" <[email protected]> Mon, 4 Oct 2010 11:39:38 +0000
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.java.javagroups.cvs |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
User: belaban
Date: 10/10/04 11:39:38
Modified: src/org/jgroups/protocols FD_SOCK.java
Log:
ns
Revision Changes Path
1.122 +3 -2 JGroups/src/org/jgroups/protocols/FD_SOCK.java
Index: FD_SOCK.java
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvsroot/javagroups/JGroups/src/org/jgroups/protocols/FD_SOCK.java,v
retrieving revision 1.121
retrieving revision 1.122
diff -u -r1.121 -r1.122
--- FD_SOCK.java 4 Oct 2010 11:27:29 -0000 1.121
+++ FD_SOCK.java 4 Oct 2010 11:39:38 -0000 1.122
@@ -32,7 +32,7 @@
* monitors the client side of the socket connection (to monitor a peer) and another one that manages the
* server socket. However, those threads will be idle as long as both peers are running.
* @author Bela Ban May 29 2001
- * @version $Id: FD_SOCK.java,v 1.121 2010/10/04 11:27:29 belaban Exp $
+ * @version $Id: FD_SOCK.java,v 1.122 2010/10/04 11:39:38 belaban Exp $
*/
@MBean(description="Failure detection protocol based on sockets connecting members")
@DeprecatedProperty(names={"srv_sock_bind_addr"})
@@ -189,7 +189,8 @@
case FdHeader.SUSPECT:
if(hdr.mbrs != null) {
- if(log.isTraceEnabled()) log.trace("[SUSPECT] hdr=" + hdr);
+ if(log.isTraceEnabled())
+ log.trace("received SUSPECT message from " + msg.getSrc() + ": suspects=" + hdr.mbrs);
for(Address m: hdr.mbrs) {
if(local_addr != null && m.equals(local_addr)) {
if(log.isWarnEnabled() && log_suspected_msgs)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Virtualization is moving to the mainstream and overtaking non-virtualized
environment for deploying applications. Does it make network security
easier or more difficult to achieve? Read this whitepaper to separate the
two and get a better understanding.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/hp-phase2-d2d