Provides GracefulShutdown functionality

[OlegDokuka]

closes #988

Signed-off-by: Oleh Dokuka [email protected]
Signed-off-by: Oleh Dokuka [email protected]

[rstoyanchev]

Great changes!

There are 5 sinks passed around for coordination, in addition to 2 more Monos for when both sides are completed or closed. It takes some effort to trace their usages and I'm thinking we could encapsulate this behavior a bit to make the graceful shutdown code a bit more readable and intuitive.

As far as I can see this is primarily requester side driven, but the responder does need to be told when graceful shutdown begins, and it also needs to be able to communicate when it is done on its own side.

Let's say we have a package private contract like this:

interface GracefulShutdownTracker {

  Mono<Void> onGracefulShutdownStarted();

  Sinks.Empty<Void> responderCompletedSink();

  Sinks.Empty<Void> responderClosedSink();

}

Then inside RSocketRequester:

class RSocketRequester extends RequesterResponderSupport implements RSocket {

  private final DefaultGracefulShutdownTracker shutdownTracker = new DefaultGracefulShutdownTracker();

  // ...

  public GracefulShutdownTracker getGracefulShutdownTracker() {
    return gracefulShutdownTracker;
  }


  private final static class DefaultGracefulShutdownTracker implements GracefulShutdownTracker {

    private final Sinks.Empty<Void> startedSink = Sinks.unsafe().empty();

    private final Sinks.Empty<Void> completedSink = Sinks.unsafe().empty();
    private final Sinks.Empty<Void> closedSink = Sinks.unsafe().empty();

    private final Sinks.Empty<Void> responderCompletedSink = Sinks.unsafe().empty();
    private final Sinks.Empty<Void> responderClosedSink = Sinks.unsafe().empty();

    public Mono<Void> onGracefulShutdownStarted() {
      return startedSink.asMono();
    }

    @Override
    public Sinks.Empty<Void> responderCompletedSink() {
      return responderCompletedSink;
    }

    @Override
    public Sinks.Empty<Void> responderClosedSink() {
      return responderClosedSink;
    }

    Mono<Void> onBothCompleted() {
      return Mono.whenDelayError(
              responderCompletedSink.asMono(),
              completedSink.asMono());
    }

    Mono<Void> onBothClosed() {
      return Mono.whenDelayError(
              responderClosedSink.asMono(),
              closedSink.asMono());
    }
  }

}

Now RSocketRequester has all the Sinks and Monos it needs access internally to do its work, and also declares a GracefulShutdownControl getter that exposes what the responder needs to do its work.

This makes it clear who has what responsibility, it removes the need to pass local variables around, replacing those with a single container, and it's an opportunity to shorten sink names, to give monos a name, etc.

[rstoyanchev]

One more note. Currently, RequestResponderSupport has an onGracefulShutdownSink as a constructor initiailized field.

In my proposal above, this could be replaced with an abstract method, something like void GracefulShutdownCompleted() which the requester and the responder would implemented accordingly based on what's available to them.