I meant the Boolean property saying auto remove address. I didn’t realize that was the issue.
On Tue, Oct 26, 2021 at 9:27 AM Clebert Suconic <clebert.suco...@gmail.com> wrote: > I did not realize there was a management operation in the mix. I agree > with Robbie > > @Havret let me know if that’s the issue please ? > > > On Tue, Oct 26, 2021 at 6:05 AM Robbie Gemmell <robbie.gemm...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> If the management API has a queue deletion operation that takes an >> 'auto delete address' boolean then I would consider it a bug if it >> doesnt actually [eventually] delete a previously >> auto-created-by-management address when that boolean is true, >> regardless of the broker config. >> >> If it doesnt delete the address then it seems effectively useless; if >> it only does anything if auto-delete-address was set true in the >> broker config then why does the management boolean even exist at all? >> It then seems to do nearly or absolutely nothing (unless setting the >> management boolean false will somehow prevent the address being >> auto-deleted by the broker even if its auto-delete config is set >> true...seems unlikely)? >> >> Personally I think this is a bug and the explicit management boolean >> should be respected, it and the broker auto deletion are not even >> really the same form of auto-deletion. The general auto-deletion >> mechanism is a sweep recognising unused auto-created things. The >> management operation is an explicit command that 'im deleting the >> queue, also auto delete its address now, the one that you auto-created >> earlier, so that I dont have to go do that separately'. It is >> essentially a shortcut to avoid needing to perform another management >> operation. >> >> At the very least if it is to be considered not-a-bug it should throw >> an exception when the value is true if it isnt actually going to work, >> e.g an IllegalStateException, alerting the user to their folly of >> expecting it to work in the obvious way it previously seems to have. >> >> In reverse, I would also expect/assume an 'auto create address' >> management boolean on queue creation to work, even when the 'auto >> create addresses' broker config is set false. If not, again it should >> throw. >> >> On Tue, 26 Oct 2021 at 06:39, Havret <h4v...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > >> > It seems I was assuming that calling destroy queue via management API >> has >> > greater precedence than configuration setting. With that being said I >> will >> > just update the client docs, so the API doesn't confuse users anymore. >> > >> > To summarize: >> > If you create a queue with *auto-create-address *flag set to true, and >> then >> > try to destroy it, the flag *autoDeleteAddress *will work only, and >> only if >> > the broker configuration has *auto-delete-addresses* flag set to true. >> > >> > On Tue, Oct 26, 2021 at 12:31 AM Clebert Suconic < >> clebert.suco...@gmail.com> >> > wrote: >> > >> > > If auto-delete is disabled, the address should not be removed. >> > > >> > > If you had a case where it was removed, it was a bug. >> > > >> > > The flag was respected before.. but perhaps there was a situation it >> was >> > > not. >> > > >> > > >> > > You telling me to disrespect the flag and always remove it.. would be >> > > an oxymoron.. I would just pretty much ignore the setting. >> > > >> > > On Mon, Oct 25, 2021 at 4:56 PM Havret <h4v...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > > > >> > > > This particular queue is not defined in broker.xml. I'm not sure if >> 2.19 >> > > is >> > > > semantically correct, as having the same configuration I'm getting >> > > > different results than with 2.18 and previous versions. I >> understand that >> > > > removing the address was decoupled from removing the queue, but in >> this >> > > > particular case the address is never deleted. >> > > > >> > > > I'm gessing that changes related to >> > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARTEMIS-3502, >> > > auto-delete-addresses >> > > > flag, and management API delete queue (with autoDeleteAddress set to >> > > true) >> > > > don't play nice together. >> > > > >> > > > My expectation would be that the address will be eventually deleted >> even >> > > > though the auto-delete-addresses flag is disabled in broker >> > > configuration. >> > > > This is an imperative API call, at least from the client >> perspective. >> > > > >> > > > On Mon, Oct 25, 2021 at 5:46 AM Clebert Suconic < >> > > clebert.suco...@gmail.com> >> > > > wrote: >> > > > >> > > > > I believe 2.19 is semantically correct to the configuration you >> are >> > > > > showing. >> > > > > >> > > > > We also had another change related to not delete queues defined on >> > > > > broker.xml. Perhaps that’s the problem ? >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > On Sun, Oct 24, 2021 at 9:38 AM Havret <h4v...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > > > > >> > > > > > Hi Clebert, >> > > > > > >> > > > > > I had the same broker configuration for 2.18.0 and the test >> passed >> > > just >> > > > > > fine, so I don't think that the matter of new defaults. The >> queue is >> > > > > > removed just fine ( >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> https://github.com/Havret/dotnet-activemq-artemis-client/blob/6cee91547c18194330062a48c3b02c7c385457ff/test/ArtemisNetClient.IntegrationTests/TopologyManagement/DeleteQueueSpec.cs#L68 >> > > > > > ), >> > > > > > the problem is that the management api seems to ignore >> > > autoDeleteAddress >> > > > > > parameter and the second assertion fails ( >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> https://github.com/Havret/dotnet-activemq-artemis-client/blob/6cee91547c18194330062a48c3b02c7c385457ff/test/ArtemisNetClient.IntegrationTests/TopologyManagement/DeleteQueueSpec.cs#L70 >> > > > > > ) >> > > > > > >> > > > > > Thanks, >> > > > > > Havret >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > On Thu, Oct 21, 2021 at 2:54 AM Clebert Suconic < >> > > > > clebert.suco...@gmail.com >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > wrote: >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > The answer for that is in your configuration: >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > <auto-delete-queues>false</auto-delete-queues> >> > > > > > > <auto-delete-addresses>false</auto-delete-addresses> >> > > > > > > <auto-delete-created-queues>false</auto-delete-created-queues> >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > if you create a new broker configuration now, these >> auto-deletes >> > > are >> > > > > > > turned off. >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > I did that because I have been recommending people in >> production to >> > > > > > > turn them off.. so I thought I should just turn'em off by >> > > default... >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > I couldn't change the default default, but I added these to >> new >> > > > > > > configurations... >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > if you need to test auto-delete, you need to set them true. >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > Notice that since 2.19 now these will perform a scan before an >> > > actual >> > > > > > > delete would happen. >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > This is because I had seen a production issue where a >> consumer that >> > > > > > > was up to date, disconnected (connection failure), the close >> > > deleted >> > > > > > > the queue immediately, while immediately it caused to another >> > > queue to >> > > > > > > be created... in one cirtcunstance the queue was created but >> not >> > > the >> > > > > > > address, creating a mess.. >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > I tried to fixing it properly without adding the delays, but I >> > > could >> > > > > > > not come up with a scenario that would always work perfectly.. >> > > because >> > > > > > > the client will query for the queue, and then issue a create >> > > > > > > separately.. there's always an issue between the queue and >> > > create... >> > > > > > > so... the best is to not remove the queue immediately any >> more... >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > On Wed, Oct 20, 2021 at 4:33 PM Havret <hav...@apache.org> >> wrote: >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > Hi, >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > I'm trying to update the test suite of ArtemisNetClient to >> use >> > > > > ActiveMQ >> > > > > > > > Artemis 2.19.0, but one of the tests starts failing on >> 2.19.0: >> > > > > > > > Should_delete_queue_alongside_with_auto_created_address --> >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> https://github.com/Havret/dotnet-activemq-artemis-client/pull/300/checks?check_run_id=3943848841 >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > The test creates a queue using the management api and then >> > > removes it >> > > > > > > with >> > > > > > > > flag autoDeleteAddress set to true. The queue is removed >> but the >> > > > > > address >> > > > > > > > isn't. I've looked over the release notes, but I didn't spot >> > > anything >> > > > > > > that >> > > > > > > > could indicate this change of behavior. Is this a >> regression, or >> > > was >> > > > > > it a >> > > > > > > > deliberate change? >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > Robbie suggested that it might be related to >> > > > > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARTEMIS-3502 >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > I tried to adjust the test: >> > > > > > > > - I set *address-queue-scan-period* to 100 >> > > > > > > > - I wait up to 5 seconds until the address is removed >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > But the test still is failing. My broker configuration is as >> > > follows: >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> https://github.com/Havret/dotnet-activemq-artemis-client/blob/fc256b2a3784447fa4feadea58b62f58d1fcabfd/test/artemis/broker.xml >> > > > > > > > Is it possible that this new setting interferes with >> > > > > > > > *auto-delete-addresses *set to *false*? >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > Thanks, >> > > > > > > > Havret >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > -- >> > > > > > > Clebert Suconic >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > -- >> > > > > Clebert Suconic >> > > > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > -- >> > > Clebert Suconic >> > > >> > -- > Clebert Suconic > -- Clebert Suconic
