Skip to content
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

Proper error handling in RMQ DB. #34

Closed
koparasy opened this issue Dec 7, 2023 · 2 comments
Closed

Proper error handling in RMQ DB. #34

koparasy opened this issue Dec 7, 2023 · 2 comments
Assignees

Comments

@koparasy
Copy link
Member

koparasy commented Dec 7, 2023

Currently when errors happen in the AMS lib RMQ database we tend to completely fail. We need to reliably continue execution and re-establish the connection.

This should become after #30 is merged in.

@koparasy koparasy added this to the AMS Workflow scheduler milestone Dec 7, 2023
lpottier added a commit that referenced this issue Feb 12, 2024
- Broker will restart if underlying connection is faulty

- Broker will send unacknowledged from previous connection (this could result in messages being received twice or more if errors happen with the wrong timing)

- Fixed a Static Initialization Order Fiasco (actually destruction fiasco) in ResourceManager and AMS DB

Signed-off-by: Loic Pottier <[email protected]>
lpottier added a commit that referenced this issue Feb 12, 2024
- Broker will restart if underlying connection is faulty

- Broker will send unacknowledged from previous connection (this could result in messages being received twice or more if errors happen with the wrong timing)

- Fixed a Static Initialization Order Fiasco (actually destruction fiasco) in ResourceManager and AMS DB

Signed-off-by: Loic Pottier <[email protected]>
lpottier added a commit that referenced this issue Feb 12, 2024
- Broker will restart if underlying connection is faulty

- Broker will send unacknowledged from previous connection (this could result in messages being received twice or more if errors happen with the wrong timing)

- Fixed a Static Initialization Order Fiasco (actually destruction fiasco) in ResourceManager and AMS DB

Signed-off-by: Loic Pottier <[email protected]>
lpottier added a commit that referenced this issue Feb 12, 2024
- Broker will restart if underlying connection is faulty

- Broker will send unacknowledged from previous connection (this could result in messages being received twice or more if errors happen with the wrong timing)

- Fixed a Static Initialization Order Fiasco (actually destruction fiasco) in ResourceManager and AMS DB

Signed-off-by: Loic Pottier <[email protected]>
lpottier added a commit that referenced this issue Feb 12, 2024
- Broker will restart if underlying connection is faulty

- Broker will send unacknowledged from previous connection (this could result in messages being received twice or more if errors happen with the wrong timing)

- Fixed a Static Initialization Order Fiasco (actually destruction fiasco) in ResourceManager and AMS DB

Signed-off-by: Loic Pottier <[email protected]>
lpottier added a commit that referenced this issue Feb 12, 2024
- Broker will restart if underlying connection is faulty

- Broker will send unacknowledged from previous connection (this could result in messages being received twice or more if errors happen with the wrong timing)

- Fixed a Static Initialization Order Fiasco (actually destruction fiasco) in ResourceManager and AMS DB

Signed-off-by: Loic Pottier <[email protected]>
koparasy pushed a commit that referenced this issue Feb 14, 2024
- Broker will restart if underlying connection is faulty

- Broker will send unacknowledged from previous connection (this could result in messages being received twice or more if errors happen with the wrong timing)

- Fixed a Static Initialization Order Fiasco (actually destruction fiasco) in ResourceManager and AMS DB

Signed-off-by: Loic Pottier <[email protected]>
@koparasy
Copy link
Member Author

Should we close this?

@lpottier
Copy link
Collaborator

Yes, I am closing it.

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

No branches or pull requests

2 participants