[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARTEMIS-4558?focusedWorklogId=898836&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:worklog-tabpanel#worklog-898836
]
ASF GitHub Bot logged work on ARTEMIS-4558:
-------------------------------------------
Author: ASF GitHub Bot
Created on: 10/Jan/24 02:20
Start Date: 10/Jan/24 02:20
Worklog Time Spent: 10m
Work Description: clebertsuconic commented on code in PR #4734:
URL: https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/4734#discussion_r1446811859
##########
artemis-protocols/artemis-amqp-protocol/src/main/java/org/apache/activemq/artemis/protocol/amqp/connect/mirror/AMQPMirrorControllerSource.java:
##########
@@ -609,10 +600,22 @@ private Message createMessage(SimpleString address,
SimpleString queue, Object e
return
AMQPMirrorMessageFactory.createMessage(snfQueue.getAddress().toString(),
address, queue, event, brokerID, body, ackReason);
}
- public static void route(ActiveMQServer server, Message message) throws
Exception {
+ public static void routeMirrorCommand(ActiveMQServer server, Message
message) throws Exception {
+ message.setMessageID(server.getStorageManager().generateID());
+ RoutingContext ctx = mirrorControlRouting.get();
+ // it is important to use local only at the source to avoid having the
message strictly load balancing
+ // to other nodes if the SNF queue has the same name as the one on this
node.
+
ctx.clear().setMirrorOption(MirrorOption.disabled).setLoadBalancingType(MessageLoadBalancingType.LOCAL_ONLY);
+ server.getPostOffice().route(message, ctx, false);
+ }
Review Comment:
thanks for pointing that out.. During my hacking I had a few versions where
I was using a different route Method. As it stands I missed simplifying at the
end.. thanks
Issue Time Tracking
-------------------
Worklog Id: (was: 898836)
Time Spent: 1h 20m (was: 1h 10m)
> AMQP Mirror ACKS should be idempotent
> -------------------------------------
>
> Key: ARTEMIS-4558
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARTEMIS-4558
> Project: ActiveMQ Artemis
> Issue Type: Bug
> Reporter: Clebert Suconic
> Assignee: Clebert Suconic
> Priority: Major
> Fix For: 2.32.0
>
> Time Spent: 1h 20m
> Remaining Estimate: 0h
>
> When I first developed Mirroring, I assumed sending the mirrored ACK on a
> aferACK and disconnected from any other transactions would be enough, with
> the caveat you could get a duplicate delivery on the target mirror in case of
> failures.
> I got some complains that this is not safe enough from some users, and I'm
> making this now idempotent.
> I took an overal mirroring hardening approach and I'm improving test coverage
> for this improvement.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.10#820010)
