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

Proposal: Change loglevel to Warning for duplicate priorities in pubsub topic subscriptions #992

Open
arnoldpistorius opened this issue Dec 6, 2022 · 3 comments

Comments

@arnoldpistorius
Copy link

I have multiple TopicAttributes on the same topic with different filters. The priority of the filters doesn't matter, because they don't overlap. Without a priority on the attribute, the SDK will log the error below. In my opinion this should be warning instead of an error, because:

  • The application continues execution and is functioning properly
  • Monitoring tools will pick up the false-positive error

logger.LogError("A subscription to topic {name} on pubsub {pubsub} has duplicate priorities for {priority}: found {count} occurrences.", first.Name, first.PubsubName, entry.Key, entry.Value);

Let me know what you think, I can submit a PR if you want.

@Yeg-A
Copy link

Yeg-A commented Mar 1, 2024

Do we have to explicitly assign priorities even in scenarios where that isn't relevant?

@BC89
Copy link

BC89 commented Jul 23, 2024

I'm seeing the same with the .Net SDK and don't really understand the intent of priorities as it seems required and necessarily unique which is odd.

@WhitWaldo
Copy link
Contributor

Seems like an easy fix in that it's simply not factoring in matches into whether there are duplicates and looking only at component name, route name and priority to make that determination. Adding e.Match to the grouping here would limit showing the error only to those routes that share the same priority and match and thus overlap.

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

No branches or pull requests

4 participants