-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.1k
INT-4542: CorrMH: Use popSequenceDetails properly #2591
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
Merged
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
4 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
ba7405b
INT-4542: CorrMH: Use popSequenceDetails properly
artembilan f337141
* Add `AbstractCorrelatingMessageHandler.popSequenceDetails` property
artembilan 9d75acf
* Rename property to just a `popSequence`
artembilan 81f6e0d
* Fix JavaDocs on the `AbstractCorrelatingMessageHandler.setPopSequen…
artembilan File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
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
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
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
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
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
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
Oops, something went wrong.
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.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Now I look at this, I wonder if it is completely valid to do this unconditionally. Consider
If the custom splitter doesn't push sequence details, we will remove the real ones from the first splitter.
Perhaps we need a new flag
alwaysPopSequenceDetails
(true in 5.1, false in 5.0) - even in the abstract output processor.Or, add some metadata (
seqInfoId
) to the sequence details and only pop if the splitter and aggregator are configured with the same metadata.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
OK. Sounds like we just need to be sure that our aggregation is based on the
sequenceDetails
. Because customsplitter
may not be based on theapplySequence
.So, maybe just an extra
sequenceApplied
header? But then how to understand on which level it has not been used?..Or... I just don't see the whole picture and need to sleep with this...
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
After sleeping with this, I came with the conclusion that your suggestion about
popSequenceDetails(true|false)
is the way to go.We won't pollute messages with some extra header which may be really out of control and I don't want to tie an aggregator with the splitter.
We may do a condition based on the default
HeaderAttributeCorrelationStrategy(IntegrationMessageHeaderAccessor.CORRELATION_ID)
andSimpleSequenceSizeReleaseStrategy
, but that still doesn't come as a robust solution since we can use defaults, but populate sequence header some other way, not via splitter.From here I think we just need to add such a
popSequenceDetails
option to the correlation handler, make ittrue
by default (looks like most cases, since we haven't had issues so far), modify aAbstractAggregatingMessageGroupProcessor
to return aAbstractIntegrationMessageBuilder
instead of the whole message and do conditional.popSequenceDetails()
already in theAbstractCorrelatingMessageHandler
.Saying that I don't think that we are good for back-porting to
5.0.x
: looks like this is going to be some breaking change.Let me know WDYT?
Thanks
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Maybe call it simply
popSequence
with the documentation explaining it undoes the nearest upstreamapplySequence
?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Makes sense. Will fix soon.