♻️ rabbitmq queue names ⚠️🚨

[GitHK]

devops ⚠️

Should have no impact when releasing.
TL:DR;: the names of the exclusive queues where changed, not the other queues.

What do these changes do?

NOTE: the side effect of this is that the web socket does not connect. Users see the red cloud and they cannot open projects.

• ♻️ fixed get_rabbitmq_client_unique_name which now actually returns a unique queue name that is stable for the service slot in which is running. This means that if a container restarts, even with multiple replaces, the same name will be given.
• ♻️ since the docker webserver image is used to run multiple services, there is a collision in the uniqueness of the "client_unique_name". All services that are run from the same base docker image get a slightly different hostname.
• 🐛 webserver fails on boot if it cannot subscribe to a queue, no longer continues to start

Related issue/s

How to test

Dev-ops checklist

• No ENV changes or I properly updated ENV (read the instruction)

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 79.8%. Comparing base (cafbf96) to head (23b21bf).
Report is 262 commits behind head on master.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff            @@
##           master   #5931      +/-   ##
=========================================
- Coverage    84.5%   79.8%    -4.8%     
=========================================
  Files          10     500     +490     
  Lines         214   25580   +25366     
  Branches       25       0      -25     
=========================================
+ Hits          181   20418   +20237     
- Misses         23    5162    +5139     
+ Partials       10       0      -10     

Flag	Coverage Δ
integrationtests	51.0% <ø> (?)
unittests	81.5% <ø> (-3.1%)	⬇️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

Files	Coverage Δ
...server/notifications/_rabbitmq_consumers_common.py	100.0% <ø> (ø)

... and 509 files with indirect coverage changes

[sanderegg]

thanks!

[mrnicegyu11]

Thanks a lot, I see no warning signals or exclamation marks etc., so I presume it is fine if this change does not go into the next prod release (this week) but only in the next one, likely in 4-6 weeks. Is that correct?

[sonarcloud]

Quality Gate passed

Issues
0 New issues
0 Accepted issues

Measures
0 Security Hotspots
No data about Coverage
0.1% Duplication on New Code

See analysis details on SonarCloud

[GitHK]

Thanks a lot, I see no warning signals or exclamation marks etc., so I presume it is fine if this change does not go into the next prod release (this week) but only in the next one, likely in 4-6 weeks. Is that correct?

@mrnicegyu11 after double checking with @sanderegg we do not expect any side effects when deploying. Maybe do you still want to flag it with a warning to just keep an eye on it? @matusdrobuliak66

[matusdrobuliak66]

thanks

[odeimaiz]

thanks

[pcrespov]

Good catch! Thx

NOTE: perhaps we can add a simple test to guarantee this along services that use the same images?