-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/860/
-----------------------------------------------------------

(Updated 2011-06-16 15:25:17.977221)


Review request for qpid, Alan Conway, Gordon Sim, and Kim van der Riet.


Changes
-------

Based on feedback, I've tried to clean up the Queue::dequeue() interface and 
per-dequeue callback handling.

In addition, I've done some performance tuning (results have been uploaded to 
QPID-3079 as a comment).  At this point, the performance of this patch is on 
par or better than the baseline.


Summary
-------

Modifies the broker's handling of Message.Accept to hold off the completion of 
the command until all messages related to the accept have completed dequeue.  
This particularly applies to persistent messages, as the store::dequeue() 
operation must complete before the message is considered fully dequeued.

Note this bugfix requires some changes to the broker's store module interface:  
previously, the store only identified the message when a dequeue was completed. 
 This is not enough information - the queue from which is was removed must also 
be identified (the message may be in the process of being dequeued on several 
queues at once).


This addresses bug qpid-3079.
    https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/qpid-3079


Diffs (updated)
-----

  /branches/qpid-3079/qpid/cpp/src/qpid/broker/DeliveryRecord.h 1124895 
  /branches/qpid-3079/qpid/cpp/src/qpid/broker/DeliveryRecord.cpp 1124895 
  /branches/qpid-3079/qpid/cpp/src/qpid/broker/PersistableMessage.cpp 1124895 
  /branches/qpid-3079/qpid/cpp/src/qpid/broker/Queue.h 1124895 
  /branches/qpid-3079/qpid/cpp/src/qpid/broker/Queue.cpp 1124895 
  /branches/qpid-3079/qpid/cpp/src/qpid/broker/SemanticState.cpp 1124895 

Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/860/diff


Testing
-------

broker unit tests, store unit tests (modified jboss store).   Still needs to be 
vetted on non-linux, and have latest trunk merged in.


Thanks,

Kenneth

Reply via email to