This repository has been archived by the owner on Feb 18, 2021. It is now read-only.
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 96
Outputhost: add support for delay and skip-older #234
Merged
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
3 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'm not sure I agree with applying the delay to start-from...
If I were to say 'start-from = tuesday', delay = 48h, then I expect to receive the first message enqueued on Tuesday at 12:00:01am on Thursday.
Doesn't seem like you need to take delay into account in start-from for that to work out.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The "start-from" applies to the "visibility time" of the message .. and the visibility-time takes into account the delay. So when we do a GAFT to store, we need to offset the given start-from by the delay.
For your example, the first message that they would see .. would be the one enqueued on Sunday midnight, delayed by 48h.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Doesn't this mean that "future start-from" needs to be a thing? We don't allow that space to be used right now.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
So a "future start from" is technically disallowed -- you cannot create a CG with a start-from beyond a minute into the future (we have checks in frontend create-consumer-group). That said, it is not illegal to have a future start-from associated with an OpenReadStream call from outputhost to storehost -- though this particular code does not enable that scenario; when a 'delay' is specified, the internal start-from value is further pushed into the past by the 'delay' value.