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

Quorum Queue Reconciliation Support? #1029

Closed
LangJV opened this issue Dec 3, 2024 · 4 comments · Fixed by #1030
Closed

Quorum Queue Reconciliation Support? #1029

LangJV opened this issue Dec 3, 2024 · 4 comments · Fixed by #1030
Labels
enhancement New feature or request

Comments

@LangJV
Copy link
Contributor

LangJV commented Dec 3, 2024

I can see that: rabbitmq/rabbitmq-server#8218 Added support for some "quorum queue auto reconciliation parameters" that are disabled by default.

I know this module cannot use the "new" config file (yet) so i traced the schema back and found the "old style" parameters: https://github.com/rabbitmq/rabbitmq-server/blob/658d5b889db426fa1cca390022d39fbcebf94577/deps/rabbit/priv/schema/rabbit.schema#L2598-L2618

However - im not sure how to implement these. Previously, and with other random things I've needed to implement, i was able to simply add it to the "config_additional_variables" section in an open ended HASH. But it's always been a completely "new or separate" config item. Like "rabbitmq_auth_backend_cache", "rabbitmq_auth_backend_http", "rabbitmq_stream", etc.

However for these parameters, they are nested within the "rabbit" section of the configuration, which already seems exclusively controlled by 1:1 puppet parameters set on the "rabbitmq" puppet class when calling it.

Do I need this module modified to support these 5 new parameters on the rabbitmq class? Or is it smart enough that if I add them properly to the "config_additional_variables" segment, it will automatically "compile" the configuration file properly, nesting all the "rabbit" items together intelligently?

I "think" i could likely get it updated to support this, but am hoping i can just feed the info to config_additional_variables and itll just work?

@wyardley
Copy link
Contributor

wyardley commented Dec 3, 2024

I'm not sure, but my guess is that it won't Just Work automagically.

@LangJV
Copy link
Contributor Author

LangJV commented Dec 4, 2024

I started working on something that "might" let it work. It probably doesn't conform to the contribution guidelines yet. I can try to work on that another day/time

#1030

@wyardley
Copy link
Contributor

wyardley commented Dec 4, 2024

I started working on something that "might" let it work. It probably doesn't conform to the contribution guidelines yet. I can try to work on that another day/time

Thanks. yes, at a minimum, you'll want to make sure to update the reference docs (see contribution guidelines), and also add / update test coverage.

@LangJV
Copy link
Contributor Author

LangJV commented Dec 5, 2024

Updated, looks to be passing now, think i have tests and reference docs covered. Disclosure, never written spec tests before, did some copy/pasting and i "think" I covered the reasonable combinations of inputs.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants