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][broker] Only get consumer future when interceptor not null #19022

Conversation

michaeljmarshall
Copy link
Member

Motivation

Builds on #18997. Essentially, we shouldn't get the consumer future when there isn't a broker interceptor.

Modifications

  • Move the conditional check for brokerInterceptor != null earlier to prevent unnecessary work.

Verifying this change

This is a trivial change.

Documentation

  • doc-not-needed

@michaeljmarshall michaeljmarshall added type/enhancement The enhancements for the existing features or docs. e.g. reduce memory usage of the delayed messages area/broker doc-not-needed Your PR changes do not impact docs ready-to-test labels Dec 21, 2022
@michaeljmarshall michaeljmarshall added this to the 2.12.0 milestone Dec 21, 2022
@michaeljmarshall michaeljmarshall self-assigned this Dec 21, 2022
@codecov-commenter
Copy link

codecov-commenter commented Dec 21, 2022

Codecov Report

Merging #19022 (af2af2f) into master (08591d9) will decrease coverage by 2.73%.
The diff coverage is 58.82%.

Impacted file tree graph

@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##             master   #19022      +/-   ##
============================================
- Coverage     49.85%   47.12%   -2.74%     
- Complexity     8658    10620    +1962     
============================================
  Files           500      709     +209     
  Lines         54930    69352   +14422     
  Branches       5867     7440    +1573     
============================================
+ Hits          27386    32681    +5295     
- Misses        24464    33002    +8538     
- Partials       3080     3669     +589     
Flag Coverage Δ
unittests 47.12% <58.82%> (-2.74%) ⬇️

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

Impacted Files Coverage Δ
...g/apache/pulsar/broker/lookup/TopicLookupBase.java 55.17% <ø> (+4.33%) ⬆️
...rg/apache/pulsar/broker/web/PulsarWebResource.java 58.34% <ø> (+2.68%) ⬆️
...va/org/apache/pulsar/broker/service/ServerCnx.java 48.34% <33.33%> (+0.53%) ⬆️
...pulsar/broker/admin/impl/PersistentTopicsBase.java 59.44% <72.72%> (+0.72%) ⬆️
...rvice/schema/KeyValueSchemaCompatibilityCheck.java 21.62% <0.00%> (-45.95%) ⬇️
...lsar/broker/loadbalance/impl/ThresholdShedder.java 3.27% <0.00%> (-27.05%) ⬇️
.../apache/pulsar/broker/loadbalance/LoadManager.java 61.11% <0.00%> (-16.67%) ⬇️
...tent/NonPersistentDispatcherMultipleConsumers.java 40.74% <0.00%> (-12.35%) ⬇️
...apache/pulsar/broker/service/TopicListService.java 40.80% <0.00%> (-12.00%) ⬇️
...pulsar/broker/service/PulsarCommandSenderImpl.java 66.32% <0.00%> (-9.19%) ⬇️
... and 250 more

Copy link
Contributor

@nicoloboschi nicoloboschi left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Good catch!

@codelipenghui codelipenghui merged commit 74017d5 into apache:master Dec 22, 2022
@michaeljmarshall michaeljmarshall deleted the optimize-call-to-broker-interceptor branch December 22, 2022 07:38
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
area/broker doc-not-needed Your PR changes do not impact docs ready-to-test 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.

None yet

5 participants