Skip to content

Conversation

@dhui
Copy link
Contributor

@dhui dhui commented Apr 21, 2018

Addresses #253 for SQS

@codecov-io
Copy link

Codecov Report

Merging #277 into master will decrease coverage by 0.01%.
The diff coverage is 0%.

Impacted file tree graph

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master     #277      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   43.64%   43.63%   -0.02%     
==========================================
  Files          31       31              
  Lines        2715     2716       +1     
==========================================
  Hits         1185     1185              
- Misses       1396     1397       +1     
  Partials      134      134
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
v1/brokers/aws_sqs.go 53.65% <0%> (-0.33%) ⬇️

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update baf17b7...ccc3b9c. Read the comment docs.

@RichardKnop RichardKnop merged commit 2d6e01e into RichardKnop:master Apr 22, 2018
@dhui dhui deleted the sqs_ack branch April 22, 2018 15:19
// Delete message after consuming successfully
err := b.deleteOne(delivery)
err := taskProcessor.Process(sig)
if err != nil {
Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Isn't it a bug? It would only delete the task if task processor failed.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Oh, it does appear that way! I believe this should be if err == nil!

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Not sure why the diff is misleading.

Code was changed here: 74f2b63

And code in the master branch looks fine: https://github.com/RichardKnop/machinery/blob/master/v1/brokers/sqs/sqs.go#L197

Copy link
Owner

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think this has been corrected in master branch already. Please check the code in the master branch if it is correct. I am not too familiar with the SQS broker code as I haven't written it (I know much more about AMQP and Redis which was originally written by me).

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.

4 participants