Fix: DLQ expects us to pass down an event #1012
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
regressed after implementing data-stream support due lack of testing
kares
force-pushed
the
fix-dlq-writer-event-regression
branch
from
4dcd8c3 to
d33b388
Compare
kares
commented
Apr 20, 2021
| EventActionTuple.new(action, params, event) | ||
| end | ||
|
|
||
| class EventActionTuple < Array # TODO: acting as an array for compatibility |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
ugly but I did not want to do a proper refactoring (replacing the Array with a proper struct) at this point,
given this is meant to be a quick fix ...
kares
force-pushed
the
fix-dlq-writer-event-regression
branch
from
cc4d582 to
d30cf0e
Compare
kares
force-pushed
the
fix-dlq-writer-event-regression
branch
from
d30cf0e to
f7dfb42
Compare
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
since Data Streams, we refactored to pass down event data directly instead of the previous
event.to_hashmapping insafe_bulk(doing so potentially on every retry)there seemed to have been no reason to keep the original event around (well turns except with DLQ).
besides practical reasons the early
event.to_hashalso addressed a requirement to ... sync data stream fields without effecting the original event.unfortunately this broke DLQ support, which expects a
LS::Eventpassed onwrite(event, reason)resolves #1013