Skip to content

Cherry-picks for 2.10.23-RC.4 #6162

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 14 commits into from
Nov 22, 2024
Merged

Cherry-picks for 2.10.23-RC.4 #6162

merged 14 commits into from
Nov 22, 2024

Conversation

MauriceVanVeen and others added 14 commits November 21, 2024 15:38
…rStream/monitorConsumer

Signed-off-by: Maurice van Veen <[email protected]>
Previous behaviour of checking interface is `nil` didn't do the right
thing as a `nil` parameter could still be wrapped in an interface
descriptor that itself would be non-`nil`, so use reflection instead.

Signed-off-by: Neil Twigg <[email protected]>
There were various things wrong with this test:

1. The routes between S1 and S2 were only slow in one direction
2. The stream listened for one subject and then the publisher published
   on another
3. The final `checkFor` didn't wait to see if all of the messages had
   even been processed before going on to check preack state

Signed-off-by: Neil Twigg <[email protected]>
This adds support for reply subjects on forwarded proposals, so we can
know whether or not a leader has acted upon those proposals yet.

The `ForwardProposal` function does NOT yet use this functionality as
we cannot know in a mixed-version or upgrade scenario yet if the remote
side will be able to respond.

Signed-off-by: Neil Twigg <[email protected]>
There were multiple issues, but basically the fact that we would
not store the routed subscriptions with the origin of the LEAF they
came from made the server unable to differentiate those compared to
"local" routed subscriptions, which in some cases (like a server
restart and the resend of subscriptions) could lead to servers
sending incorrectly subscription interest to leaf connections.

We are now storing the subscriptions with a sub type indicator and
the origin (for leaf subscriptions) as part of the key. This allows
to differentiate "regular" routed subs versus the ones on behalf
of a leafnode.
An INFO boolean is added `LNOCU` to indicate support for origin
in the `LS-` protocol, which is required to properly handle the
removal. Therefore, if a route does not have `LNOCU`, the server
will behave like an old server, and store with the key that does
not contain the origin, so that it can be removed when getting
an LS- without the origin. Note that in the case of a mix of servers
in the same cluster, some of the issues this PR is trying to fix
will be present (since the server will basically behave like a
server without the fix).

Having a different routed subs for leaf connections allow to revisit
the fix #5982 that was done for issue #5972, which was about
a more fair queue distribution to a cluster of leaf connections.
That fix actually introduced a change in that we always wanted to
favor queue subscriptions of the cluster where the message is produced,
which that fix possibly changed. With this current PR, the server
can now know if a remote queue sub is for a "local" queue sub there
or on behalf of a leaf and therefore will not favor that route compared
to a leaf subscription that it may have directly attached.

Resolves #5972
Resolves #6148

Signed-off-by: Ivan Kozlovic <[email protected]>
@neilalexander neilalexander marked this pull request as ready for review November 22, 2024 16:34
@neilalexander neilalexander requested a review from a team as a code owner November 22, 2024 16:34
Copy link
Member

@derekcollison derekcollison left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM

@neilalexander neilalexander merged commit 624b120 into release/v2.10.23 Nov 22, 2024
5 checks passed
@neilalexander neilalexander deleted the neil/21023rc4 branch November 22, 2024 16:45
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants