-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 4k
amqp_client: Emit 'connection.blocked' in direct connections #14660
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Open
the-mikedavis
wants to merge
2
commits into
main
Choose a base branch
from
md/block-direct-publishes
base: main
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
+329
−144
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
Just in case it helps, the following shows how to easily trigger memory and/or disk alarms in a test case: rabbitmq-server/deps/rabbit/test/amqp_client_SUITE.erl Lines 3200 to 3234 in 2303570
|
This change also refactors them to use two unclustered nodes. This is a prerequisite for the child change which will remove the workaround of using a direct connection to be able to publish while a node is in alarm.
Previously direct 0-9-1 connections did not notice when memory or disk alarms were set. This could allow an 0-9-1 shovel where the destination is a direct connection to completely overload a broker which is already in alarm. With this change, direct connections register the connection process with `rabbit_alarm` and emit `connection.blocked` and `connection.unblocked` to the blocked handler if one is registered. `rabbit_amqp091_shovel` already respects the `connection.blocked`, so the destination will not receive any messages.
c75597c
to
9393ec9
Compare
Thanks for the pointers @ansd & @gomoripeti! I moved the existing tests for alarms and 0-9-1 shovels to a new suite and added a group there that uses a direct connection |
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.
Fixes #14657
Previously direct 0-9-1 connections did not notice when memory or disk alarms were set. This could allow an 0-9-1 shovel where the destination is a direct connection to completely overload a broker which is already in alarm. With this change, direct connections register the connection process with
rabbit_alarm
and emitconnection.blocked
andconnection.unblocked
to the blocked handler if one is registered.rabbit_amqp091_shovel
already respects theconnection.blocked
, so the destination will not receive any messages.