lovelle commented on a change in pull request #3962: Feature / Interceptor for
negative ack redelivery
URL: https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/3962#discussion_r271406140
##########
File path:
pulsar-client/src/main/java/org/apache/pulsar/client/impl/ConsumerInterceptors.java
##########
@@ -109,9 +110,29 @@ public void onAcknowledge(Consumer<T> consumer, MessageId
messageId, Throwable e
* @param exception exception returned by broker.
*/
public void onAcknowledgeCumulative(Consumer<T> consumer, MessageId
messageId, Throwable exception) {
- for (int i = 0; i < interceptors.size(); i++) {
+ for (ConsumerInterceptor<T> interceptor : interceptors) {
try {
- interceptors.get(i).onAcknowledgeCumulative(consumer,
messageId, exception);
+ interceptor.onAcknowledgeCumulative(consumer, messageId,
exception);
+ } catch (Exception e) {
+ log.warn("Error executing interceptor onAcknowledgeCumulative
callback ", e);
+ }
+ }
+ }
+
+ /**
+ * This method will be called when a redelivery from a negative
acknowledge occurs.
+ * <p>
+ * This method calls {@link
ConsumerInterceptor#onNegativeAckRedelivery(Consumer, Set<MessageId>)} method
for each interceptor.
+ * <p>
+ * This method does not throw exceptions. Exceptions thrown by any of
interceptors in the chain are logged, but not propagated.
+ *
+ * @param consumer the consumer which contains the interceptors
+ * @param messageIds set of messages ids being redelivery.
+ */
+ public void onNegativeAckRedelivery(Consumer<T> consumer, Set<MessageId>
messageIds) {
Review comment:
Yep, at a first glance I thought exactly that, but later I realise that
calling `onNegativeAck()` when `consumer.negativeAcknowledgement()` will occur
almost at that very moment (`consumer.negativeAcknowledgement()` just adds the
msg to `negativeAckTracker`) and the user could solve this by himself, instead,
with adding `onNegativeAckRedelivery()` offers a feature which the user cannot
solve right now.
The good thing about `onNegativeAck()` is that is consistent with current
`onAcknowledge()` existing method.
Maybe we want to add both features? and in some future also adding the
proper `on*()` method for `UnackMessageTracker`?
----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]
With regards,
Apache Git Services
