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

[Broker] Fix call sync method in async rest api for internalUnloadTopic #13845

Merged
merged 5 commits into from
Jan 24, 2022
Merged

[Broker] Fix call sync method in async rest api for internalUnloadTopic #13845

merged 5 commits into from
Jan 24, 2022

Conversation

mattisonchao
Copy link
Member

Motivation

Avoid call sync method in async rest API for PersistentTopicsBase#internalUnloadTopic.

Modifications

  • Use async instead of sync method.

Verifying this change

  • Make sure that the change passes the CI checks.

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

If yes was chosen, please highlight the changes

  • Dependencies (does it add or upgrade a dependency): (no)
  • The public API: ( no)
  • The schema: ( no )
  • The default values of configurations: ( no)
  • The wire protocol: ( no)
  • The rest endpoints: (no)
  • The admin cli options: (no)
  • Anything that affects deployment: (no)

Documentation

  • no-need-doc

@github-actions github-actions bot added the doc-not-needed Your PR changes do not impact docs label Jan 20, 2022
return null;
});
private void internalUnloadTransactionCoordinatorAsync(AsyncResponse asyncResponse, boolean authoritative) {
validateTopicOperationAsync(topicName, TopicOperation.UNLOAD)
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Hmmm, looks like we make the wrong permission before, for the transaction coordinator, only the superuser can unload it. @congbobo184 Could you please help confirm?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

It's ok to push a separate PR to fix this one, to make this PR more focus on what it wants to do

mattisonchao and others added 3 commits January 20, 2022 13:05
…l/PersistentTopicsBase.java

Co-authored-by: lipenghui <penghui@apache.org>
…l/PersistentTopicsBase.java

Co-authored-by: lipenghui <penghui@apache.org>
@mattisonchao
Copy link
Member Author

/pulsarbot rerun-failure-checks

1 similar comment
@mattisonchao
Copy link
Member Author

/pulsarbot rerun-failure-checks

…l/PersistentTopicsBase.java

Co-authored-by: lipenghui <penghui@apache.org>
Copy link
Contributor

@Jason918 Jason918 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
doc-not-needed Your PR changes do not impact docs
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants