Hard cap for maximum priorities #1597
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
michaelklishin
changed the title
|
How to QA priority definition via policies (a drive-by change in this feature):
Java client test PR focuses on the limits and should be self-explanatory. |
src/rabbit_amqqueue.erl
Outdated
| @@ -611,6 +611,13 @@ check_message_ttl_arg({Type, Val}, Args) -> | |||
| Error -> Error | |||
| end. | |||
|
|
|||
| check_max_priority_arg({Type, Val}, Args) -> | |||
| case check_non_neg_int_arg({Type, Val}, Args) of | |||
| ok when Val =< 255 -> ok; | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Any reason for not using the MAX_SUPPORTED_PRIORITY constant here?
src/rabbit_policies.erl
Outdated
| @@ -100,6 +101,12 @@ validate_policy0(<<"max-length-bytes">>, Value) | |||
| validate_policy0(<<"max-length-bytes">>, Value) -> | |||
| {error, "~p is not a valid maximum length in bytes", [Value]}; | |||
|
|
|||
| validate_policy0(<<"max-priority">>, Value) | |||
| when is_integer(Value), Value >= 0, Value =< 255 -> | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Same as previously, any reason for not using the MAX_SUPPORTED_PRIORITY constant here?
src/rabbit_policies.erl
Outdated
| when is_integer(Value), Value >= 0, Value =< 255 -> | ||
| ok; | ||
| validate_policy0(<<"max-priority">>, Value) -> | ||
| {error, "~p is not a valid max priority (must be an integer in the 1-255 range)", [Value]}; |
michaelklishin
changed the title
|
We found out why policies were not supported earlier: they can change while certain message store aspects of priority queues are not (must be fixed). So I will undo some portions of this PR and docs. |
This reverts commit f5aa1fb. This feature wasn't available in the original implementation for a reason: policies are dynamic and can change after a queue's been declared. However, queue priorities are (at least currently) set in stone from the moment of queue creation. This was mentioned in the docs but not explicitly enough and got overlooked. Credit for the [re-]discovery goes to @acogoluegnes :) References #1590. [#157380396]
michaelklishin
changed the title
References #1590. [#157380396]
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Proposed Changes
This [re]introduces a hard cap on the maximum number of priorities supported by priority queues. See #1590 for details.
It also makes it possible to define priorities using a policy.
Types of Changes
Checklist
CONTRIBUTING.mddocumentFurther Comments
Closes #1590.