Exposing EventHubClient to support sending Partition Key. Fixes #1643. #2225
Conversation
| @@ -72,6 +73,9 @@ public void Initialize(ExtensionConfigContext context) | |||
| context.AddBindingRule<EventHubAttribute>() | |||
| .BindToCollector(BuildFromAttribute); | |||
|
|
|||
| // register EventClient output binding | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
nit: I'd just remove this comment. It's not technically an output binding, it's a client/service input binding
| private readonly object _messageSender; | ||
| private readonly Type _type; | ||
|
|
||
| public EventHubClientBinder(object messageSender, Type type) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Wondering why this is called "messageSender" when it is an EventClient? Why is the type you use object, and not EventClient?
| @@ -72,6 +73,9 @@ public void Initialize(ExtensionConfigContext context) | |||
| context.AddBindingRule<EventHubAttribute>() | |||
| .BindToCollector(BuildFromAttribute); | |||
|
|
|||
| // register EventClient output binding | |||
| context.AddBindingRule<EventHubAttribute>().BindToValueProvider(GetEventClient); | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think you should be using BindToInput instead. See other examples in other extensions, which use this for returning "clients". Here's an example: https://github.com/Azure/azure-webjobs-sdk-extensions/blob/b7aa8f84c2b3c9065861fe955ce8180b9d19f939/src/WebJobs.Extensions.CosmosDB/Config/CosmosDBExtensionConfigProvider.cs#L58
There was a problem hiding this comment.
So you'd have something like:
context.AddBindingRule<EventHubAttribute>()
.BindToInput<EventHubClient>(a =>
{
return _options.Value.GetEventHubClient(a.EventHubName, a.Connection);
});
alrod
force-pushed
the
alrod-eh-partitionkey1
branch
from
6fcaa67
to
a3872ef
Compare
| @@ -127,41 +129,107 @@ public static void SendEvents_TestHub2(int numEvents, string input, [EventHub(Te | |||
| } | |||
| } | |||
| } | |||
| } | |||
|
|
|||
| public class EventHubPartitionKeyEndToEndTests : IClassFixture<TestFixture<EventHubPartitionKeyEndToEndTests.EventHubTestJobs>> | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
why are you creating a separate end to end test suite for this partition test? Did you run into problems? We shouldn't need a separate full test suite for each new test scenario we want to add.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
yeah, I want to reuse a eventhub for the test and I do not want create a new eventhub. If I add everything in one class another function can be triggered on new event.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Well if you consume all the events after each test that would solve the issue, right? Ensuring the checkpoint is moved to the "end". Even with your new test suite, it seems to me that you can get leakage across suites. E.g. if one suite wrote a bunch of events that didn't get fully processed (e.g. due to failures or something, or because the tests passed but didn't consume all events), the other suite will see them in the hub when it runs?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yes, the other suite will see unprocessed messages. So you propose just to create the other eventhub for the test?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We don’t want a new event hub per test, nor do we want a new test suite per test :) We need to find a way to clear/consume the messages before each test so each test starts clean.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I fixed the tests:
- Use one test suite.
- Use one eventhub.
- Filter messages for the current test is using.
alrod
force-pushed
the
alrod-eh-partitionkey1
branch
from
a3872ef
to
354190b
Compare
alrod
force-pushed
the
alrod-eh-partitionkey1
branch
from
354190b
to
7fe15ed
Compare
|
Hello @alrod. This change is mentioned in release 3.0.10, however that was a release of the |
|
Hi @mvsmal, The package should have "EventHubClient" change. |
No description provided.