Skip to content

Adds Grpc.newManagedChannel(String, ChannelCredentials, NameResolverR… #11901

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Open
wants to merge 2 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Adds Grpc.newManagedChannel(String, ChannelCredentials, NameResolverR… #11901

Show file tree
Hide file tree
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
2 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
1b5ab2c
Adds Grpc.newManagedChannel(String, ChannelCredentials, NameResolverR…
AgraVator Feb 17, 2025
67548a9
1. refactors method name to make it overloaded
AgraVator Feb 19, 2025
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
9 changes: 9 additions & 0 deletions api/src/main/java/io/grpc/Grpc.java
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -101,6 +101,15 @@ public static ManagedChannelBuilder<?> newChannelBuilder(
return ManagedChannelRegistry.getDefaultRegistry().newChannelBuilder(target, creds);
}

/**
* Creates a channel builder with a target string, credentials and nameResolverRegistry.
*/
public static ManagedChannelBuilder<?> newChannelBuilder(String target,
ChannelCredentials creds, NameResolverRegistry nameResolverRegistry) {
return ManagedChannelRegistry.getDefaultRegistry().newChannelBuilder(nameResolverRegistry,
target, creds);
}

/**
* Creates a channel builder from a host, port, and credentials. The host and port are combined to
* form an authority string and then passed to {@link #newChannelBuilder(String,
Expand Down
1 change: 0 additions & 1 deletion api/src/main/java/io/grpc/ManagedChannelRegistry.java
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -155,7 +155,6 @@ ManagedChannelBuilder<?> newChannelBuilder(String target, ChannelCredentials cre
return newChannelBuilder(NameResolverRegistry.getDefaultRegistry(), target, creds);
}

@VisibleForTesting
ManagedChannelBuilder<?> newChannelBuilder(NameResolverRegistry nameResolverRegistry,
String target, ChannelCredentials creds) {
NameResolverProvider nameResolverProvider = null;
Expand Down
20 changes: 20 additions & 0 deletions netty/src/test/java/io/grpc/netty/UdsNettyChannelProviderTest.java
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -28,7 +28,9 @@
import io.grpc.ManagedChannelProvider;
import io.grpc.ManagedChannelProvider.NewChannelBuilderResult;
import io.grpc.ManagedChannelRegistryAccessor;
import io.grpc.NameResolverRegistry;
import io.grpc.TlsChannelCredentials;
import io.grpc.internal.testing.FakeNameResolverProvider;
import io.grpc.stub.StreamObserver;
import io.grpc.testing.GrpcCleanupRule;
import io.grpc.testing.protobuf.SimpleRequest;
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -120,6 +122,24 @@ public void managedChannelRegistry_newChannelBuilder() {
channel.shutdownNow();
}

@Test
public void managedChannelRegistry_newChannelBuilderForNameResolverRegistry() {
Assume.assumeTrue(Utils.isEpollAvailable());
NameResolverRegistry nameResolverRegistry = new NameResolverRegistry();
DomainSocketAddress socketAddress = new DomainSocketAddress("test-server");
FakeNameResolverProvider fakeNameResolverProvider = new FakeNameResolverProvider(
"unix:///sock.sock", socketAddress);
nameResolverRegistry.register(fakeNameResolverProvider);
ManagedChannelBuilder<?> managedChannelBuilder
= Grpc.newChannelBuilder("unix:///sock.sock",
InsecureChannelCredentials.create(), nameResolverRegistry);
assertThat(managedChannelBuilder).isNotNull();
ManagedChannel channel = managedChannelBuilder.build();
assertThat(channel).isNotNull();
assertThat(channel.authority()).isEqualTo("/sock.sock");
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The test isn't actually working. FakeNameResolverProvider hard-codes the authority to "fake-authority". So this should be failing, because it isn't actually using your NameResolverRegistry.

And that's because the name resolver registry isn't being passed to the ManagedChannelBuilder.

grpc-java/core/src/main/java/io/grpc/internal/ManagedChannelImplBuilder.java

Line 154 in 60f6ea7

NameResolverRegistry nameResolverRegistry = NameResolverRegistry.getDefaultRegistry();

And looking deeper, that's because the NameResolverRegistry code in ManagedChannelRegistry is a bit of a hack; it doesn't coordinate with the ManagedChannelBuilder right now and instead just assumes some later logic in ManagedChannelImpl will produce similar results. It should ideally select the NameResolverProvider and pass it to the ManagedChannelProvider. But I'm not sure how much of that we want to clean up now.

Copy link
Member

@ejona86 ejona86 Feb 19, 2025 •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think we will need to change the arguments of ManagedChannelProvider.newChannelBuilder(String, ChannelCredentials). That's a bit annoying though, because we can't make that change atomically everywhere (some implementations aren't in this repo) and this is needing to modify an existing code path. So we need to add a new method to ManagedChannelProvider and have it call the existing method by default. We can update all the ManagedChannelProviders in this repo at the same time (and have the old method call the new method). After this change is imported to Google, we'll update the remaining usages and then we can delete the old method.

But I need to think more about what the new signature should look like. There's some interplay between ManagedChannelRegistry and ManagedChannelImplBuilder.getNameResolverProvider(), and it'd be nice to avoid one side assuming the behavior of the other. I also need to figure out whether the NameResolverRegistry will propagate through the channel to LoadBalancer.Helper.createResolvingOobChannel() and getNameResolverRegistry().

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I spoke with Doug, and I think the new signature should have NameResolverProvider (for this channel's use) and NameResolverRegistry (for child channel's use) added as arguments.

To help the migration, you can have the new method call the old method (and just throw away the new arguments).

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Do you mean something like #11978 for migration ?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The extra method needs to be on ManagedChannelProvider and would be non-static. But the general idea, yeah. We won't let our users pass the NameResolverProvider to io.grpc.Grpc; they'll only pass the registry. Then io.grpc.Grpc will compute the name resolver provider and pass both provider+registry to the selected managed channel provider.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Updated.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The update looks good. Why is that a separate PR? What progression of changes are you imagining for this?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I initially thought that after merging the other PR we could do the migration, because initially i had made changes to expose a new API but after the update that becomes pointless because even if we had merged it, it wouldn't be useful directly.

channel.shutdownNow();
}

@Test
public void udsClientServerTestUsingProvider() throws IOException {
Assume.assumeTrue(Utils.isEpollAvailable());
Expand Down