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

Handle missing delivery marker in CQ v1 index (backport #8453) (backport #8457) #8458

Merged
merged 6 commits into from Jun 3, 2023

Conversation

mergify[bot]
Copy link

@mergify mergify bot commented Jun 2, 2023

This is an automatic backport of pull request #8457 done by Mergify.
Cherry-pick of 74bb4c5 has failed:

On branch mergify/bp/v3.11.x/pr-8457
Your branch is ahead of 'origin/v3.11.x' by 2 commits.
  (use "git push" to publish your local commits)

You are currently cherry-picking commit 74bb4c57a6.
  (fix conflicts and run "git cherry-pick --continue")
  (use "git cherry-pick --skip" to skip this patch)
  (use "git cherry-pick --abort" to cancel the cherry-pick operation)

Unmerged paths:
  (use "git add <file>..." to mark resolution)
	both modified:   deps/rabbit/BUILD.bazel

no changes added to commit (use "git add" and/or "git commit -a")

To fix up this pull request, you can check it out locally. See documentation: https://docs.github.com/en/github/collaborating-with-pull-requests/reviewing-changes-in-pull-requests/checking-out-pull-requests-locally


Mergify commands and options

More conditions and actions can be found in the documentation.

You can also trigger Mergify actions by commenting on this pull request:

  • @Mergifyio refresh will re-evaluate the rules
  • @Mergifyio rebase will rebase this PR on its base branch
  • @Mergifyio update will merge the base branch into this PR
  • @Mergifyio backport <destination> will backport this PR on <destination> branch

Additionally, on Mergify dashboard you can:

  • look at your merge queues
  • generate the Mergify configuration with the config editor.

Finally, you can contact us on https://mergify.com

This can happen when a classic queue has messages published on a
pre-3.10 RabbitMQ version, but still present after an upgrade to 3.10+.

Fixes #7904

(cherry picked from commit be2e546)
(cherry picked from commit 690b319)
(cherry picked from commit 18a6881)
(cherry picked from commit 241d997)
(cherry picked from commit 8689f57)
(cherry picked from commit 74bb4c5)

# Conflicts:
#	deps/rabbit/BUILD.bazel
@michaelklishin
Copy link
Member

@gomoripeti v3.11.x and v3.10.x would need a bit of extra work, I'm afraid. Here's
a repeatable failure in bazel test //deps/rabbit:classic_queue_prop_SUITE:

2023-06-02 11:53:33.395
RabbitMQ node(s) in directory ?[0;32m/buildbuddy/remotebuilds/a44f91c8-3049-447f-81c4-5336a0721e5b/bazel-out/k8-fastbuild/testlogs/deps/rabbit/classic_queue_prop_SUITE/shard_6_of_8/test.outputs/ct_run.ct-rabbit-classic_queue_prop_SUITE@localhost.2023-06-02_11.53.25/deps.rabbit.classic_queue_prop_SUITE.groups.reg_v1_no_del_jif.logs/run.2023-06-02_11.53.25/log_private?[0m
Waiting for pid file '/buildbuddy/remotebuilds/a44f91c8-3049-447f-81c4-5336a0721e5b/bazel-out/k8-fastbuild/testlogs/deps/rabbit/classic_queue_prop_SUITE/shard_6_of_8/test.outputs/ct_run.ct-rabbit-classic_queue_prop_SUITE@localhost.2023-06-02_11.53.25/deps.rabbit.classic_queue_prop_SUITE.groups.reg_v1_no_del_jif.logs/run.2023-06-02_11.53.25/log_private//rmq-ct-classic_queue_regressions-1-21000@localhost/rmq-ct-classic_queue_regressions-1-21000@localhost.pid' to appear
pid is 549
Waiting for erlang distribution on node 'rmq-ct-classic_queue_regressions-1-21000@localhost' while OS process '549' is running
Waiting for applications 'rabbit_and_plugins' to start on node 'rmq-ct-classic_queue_regressions-1-21000@localhost'
Applications 'rabbit_and_plugins' are running on node 'rmq-ct-classic_queue_regressions-1-21000@localhost'
Exit code: 0 (pid <0.117.0>)
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
erpc:call failed on line 702
Reason: {{exception,{badmatch,...},[...]},[{erpc,...},{...}|...]}
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Testing deps.rabbit.classic_queue_prop_SUITE.groups.reg_v1_no_del_jif: *** FAILED test case 1 of 1 ***

@gomoripeti
Copy link
Contributor

thank you @michaelklishin for handling the backports and digging into this. I will work on fixing the 3.10/3.11 backports next week.

@gomoripeti
Copy link
Contributor

I pushed a commit cloudamqp@f92df41 to our fork that fixes the test cases for me locally at least.
Could you cherry-pick it into this branch, or should I open a new PR against v3.11.x?

(the full error looked like this for me, which seems to match the abbreviated error

   #1. {error,
            {{exception,
                 {badmatch,error},
                 [{classic_queue_prop_SUITE,cmd_setup_queue,1,
                      [{file,"classic_queue_prop_SUITE.erl"},{line,757}]},
                  {classic_queue_prop_SUITE,do_reg_v1_no_del_jif,1,
                      [{file,"classic_queue_prop_SUITE.erl"},{line,1225}]}]},
             [{erpc,call,5,[{file,"erpc.erl"},{line,702}]},
              {classic_queue_prop_SUITE,reg_v1_no_del_jif,1,
                  [{file,"classic_queue_prop_SUITE.erl"},{line,1215}]},

)

This change is equivalent with the reverse of commit f1ae007

(cherry picked from commit f92df41)
@michaelklishin
Copy link
Member

@gomoripeti pulled!

@michaelklishin
Copy link
Member

bazel test //deps/rabbit:classic_queue_prop_SUITE

now passes for me locally, hooray!

@michaelklishin michaelklishin added this to the 3.11.18 milestone Jun 3, 2023
@michaelklishin michaelklishin merged commit 19aa8d4 into v3.11.x Jun 3, 2023
16 checks passed
@michaelklishin michaelklishin deleted the mergify/bp/v3.11.x/pr-8457 branch June 3, 2023 20:59
mergify bot pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jun 3, 2023
(cherry picked from commit 13882dc)
michaelklishin added a commit that referenced this pull request Jun 3, 2023
Handle missing delivery marker in CQ v1 index (backport #8453) (backport #8457) (backport #8458)
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

2 participants