Skip to content

move storage queues to pipeline architecture #851

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

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Jun 27, 2022

Conversation

bmc-msft
Copy link
Contributor

No description provided.

Copy link
Contributor

@rylev rylev left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looks good. There's lots of little things we could improve (and I commented on a few of them), but I'd like to get this merged. We can address those things in follow-up PRs.

Comment on lines +67 to +68
/// Deletes the message. The message must not have been made visible again
/// or this call would fail.
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Suggested change
/// Deletes the message. The message must not have been made visible again
/// or this call would fail.
/// Deletes the message.
///
/// The message must not have been made visible again or this call would fail.

Comment on lines +73 to +74
/// Updates the message. The message must not have been made visible again
/// or this call would fail.
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Suggested change
/// Updates the message. The message must not have been made visible again
/// or this call would fail.
/// Updates the message.
///
/// The message must not have been made visible again or this call would fail.

Also, it might be nice to place this above delete. In Cosmos, we generally follow the order: get, create, update, delete for ordering operations.

Comment on lines 115 to 116
/// Puts a message in the queue. The body will be passed
/// to the `execute` function of the returned struct.
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Suggested change
/// Puts a message in the queue. The body will be passed
/// to the `execute` function of the returned struct.
/// Puts a message in the queue.
///
/// The body will be passed to the `execute` function of the returned struct.

queue_client,
number_of_messages: None,
visibility_timeout: None,

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Suggested change

}

#[derive(Debug, Clone, Serialize, Deserialize)]
struct MessageInternal {
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

FWIW: we probably could easily just implement Deserialize directly on Message


let a: azure_core::Result<Vec<QueueStoredAccessPolicy>> =
StoredAccessPolicyList::from_xml(&body)
.map_kind(ErrorKind::DataConversion)?
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think for these errors we really should put more context. If this bubbles to the user, they'll only get some cryptic xml parsing error.

@rylev rylev merged commit 9e76b2d into Azure:main Jun 27, 2022
@bmc-msft bmc-msft deleted the move-storage-queues-to-pipeline branch June 27, 2022 12:45
@cataggar cataggar mentioned this pull request Jun 27, 2022
9 tasks
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants