Add support to Oracle Database for Inbox/Outbox/Locking#4232
Conversation
Code Review — Add support for Oracle (#4232)Thanks for this — a large, well-structured contribution. The XML documentation is excellent, the NETFRAMEWORK vs. modern Bugs1. var requestLock = await RequestLock(connection, lockHandler, 1);
if (requestLock > 1) // treats 0 (success) AND 1 (timeout) as "granted"
{
Log.LockNotGranted(_logger, resource, requestLock);
return null;
}
It also contradicts the base contract test Fix: 2. The template is Please verify3. Trailing semicolons in the builder DDL / exists-query templates — The Minor
Test coverageGood breadth (inbox text/binary/json, outbox text/binary sync+async, locking, box provisioning) with CI wired up via Automated review — please treat as suggestions and verify against the live Oracle CI run where noted. |
Claude Code Review — PR #4232: Oracle support for Inbox/Outbox/LockingThanks for this substantial contribution! The overall structure closely mirrors the existing relational backends, the XML docs are excellent, and the 🔴 High — Migration history table name mismatch (silently breaks re-provisioning)
but
Consequences:
The fresh-database tests pass only because on a truly empty schema "history doesn't exist" happens to be the correct answer. Please pick one name (the test helper at 🔴 High — Connection leak in
|
Description
Adding support for Oracle Database for Inbox/Outbox/Locking
Related Issues
Type of Change
Checklist
Additional Notes