Frun1na opened a new issue, #4811:
URL: https://github.com/apache/rocketmq-dashboard/issues/4811

   ### Before Creating the Bug Report
   
   - [x] I have searched the [open 
issues](https://github.com/apache/rocketmq-dashboard/issues) and found no 
similar issue.
   
   ### What Happened
   
   `docs/api-spec.md` sections 5 (topic), 6 (consumer group) and 8.1 (message 
list) diverge from the
   controllers in several ways an integrator would hit directly:
   
   - 5.1 and 6.1 document `createdAt` / `updatedAt`, but `TopicVO` and 
`ConsumerGroupVO` extend
     `BaseEntity` and serialize `gmtCreate` / `gmtModified` — the web client 
reads those names too.
   - 5.8 documents `sendTime` as an ISO 8601 string; it is a `long` 
epoch-millis value
     (`SendMessageVO:30`), and the request table omits the accepted 
`instanceId`, `messageGroup`
     (FIFO) and `deliveryTimestamp` (delay) fields.
   - 6.5 marks `clusterId` / `subscriptionMode` / `consumeType` as required 
although `CreateConsumerGroupDTO`
     only validates `name`, lists a `subscribedTopics` field that does not 
exist, and omits
     `subscriptionDataType` / `deliveryOrderType` / `delaySeconds` / 
`instanceId`.
   - 6.7 documents `timestamp` as an ISO 8601 string and `topic` as optional; 
the DTO takes a positive
     epoch-millis `Long` and requires both `topic` and `instanceId` 
(`@NotBlank`).
   - 6.8 documents a `multipart/form-data` upload with an `errors[]` response; 
the endpoint takes a JSON
     body `{instanceId, groups[]}` and returns `{imported, failed, groups[], 
failures[]}`.
   - 8.1's `MessageRecord` table omits `reconsumeTimes`.
   
   ### Expected Behavior
   
   The sections should match the controllers: real field names, real 
requiredness from the validation
   annotations, and the actual request/response shapes.
   


-- 
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.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]

Reply via email to