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

[improve][cli] PIP-353: Improve transaction message visibility for peek-message #22762

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
May 28, 2024

Conversation

shibd
Copy link
Member

@shibd shibd commented May 22, 2024

Motivation

#22746

Modifications

  • Support --show-server-marker and --transaction-isolation-level flags for peek-messages cmd.

Verifying this change

  • Add testPeekMessageForSkipTxnMarker, testPeekMessageForSkipAbortedAndUnCommittedMessages and testPeekMessageForShowAllMessages unit test to corver this change.

Does this pull request potentially affect one of the following parts:

If the box was checked, please highlight the changes

  • Dependencies (add or upgrade a dependency)
  • The public API
  • The schema
  • The default values of configurations
  • The threading model
  • The binary protocol
  • The REST endpoints
  • The admin CLI options
  • The metrics
  • Anything that affects deployment

Documentation

  • doc
  • doc-required
  • doc-not-needed
  • doc-complete

Matching PR in forked repository

PR in forked repository: shibd#34

@shibd shibd added the type/enhancement The enhancements for the existing features or docs. e.g. reduce memory usage of the delayed messages label May 22, 2024
@shibd shibd added this to the 3.4.0 milestone May 22, 2024
@shibd shibd self-assigned this May 22, 2024
@github-actions github-actions bot added the doc-not-needed Your PR changes do not impact docs label May 22, 2024
@shibd shibd closed this May 22, 2024
@shibd shibd reopened this May 22, 2024
@codecov-commenter
Copy link

codecov-commenter commented May 23, 2024

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 88.46154% with 6 lines in your changes are missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 73.19%. Comparing base (bbc6224) to head (b158ff1).
Report is 310 commits behind head on master.

Additional details and impacted files

Impacted file tree graph

@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##             master   #22762      +/-   ##
============================================
- Coverage     73.57%   73.19%   -0.39%     
+ Complexity    32624    32599      -25     
============================================
  Files          1877     1891      +14     
  Lines        139502   141537    +2035     
  Branches      15299    15536     +237     
============================================
+ Hits         102638   103591     +953     
- Misses        28908    29933    +1025     
- Partials       7956     8013      +57     
Flag Coverage Δ
inttests 27.41% <0.00%> (+2.82%) ⬆️
systests 24.77% <0.00%> (+0.44%) ⬆️
unittests 72.19% <88.46%> (-0.66%) ⬇️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

Files Coverage Δ
...e/pulsar/client/api/TransactionIsolationLevel.java 100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
...pulsar/broker/admin/impl/PersistentTopicsBase.java 69.48% <94.44%> (+4.03%) ⬆️
...in/java/org/apache/pulsar/client/admin/Topics.java 76.19% <50.00%> (-1.31%) ⬇️
...pache/pulsar/client/admin/internal/TopicsImpl.java 83.44% <95.65%> (+1.43%) ⬆️
...in/java/org/apache/pulsar/admin/cli/CmdTopics.java 79.98% <50.00%> (-1.20%) ⬇️

... and 361 files with indirect coverage changes

Copy link
Contributor

@Technoboy- Technoboy- left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM

@shibd shibd requested a review from codelipenghui May 28, 2024 01:08
@shibd shibd merged commit 20e83b9 into apache:master May 28, 2024
50 checks passed
@shibd
Copy link
Member Author

shibd commented May 28, 2024

I will cherry-pick this to branch-3.0 and branch-3.3, Although it introduces a new configuration(--transaction-isolation-level and --show-server-marker) on admin CLI, it fixes the incorrect behavior by default when this configuration is not used.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
cherry-picked/branch-3.0 cherry-picked/branch-3.3 doc-not-needed Your PR changes do not impact docs PIP ready-to-test release/3.0.6 release/3.3.1 type/enhancement The enhancements for the existing features or docs. e.g. reduce memory usage of the delayed messages
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants