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

Cherry-picks for 2.10.26-RC.4 #6520

Merged
merged 9 commits into from
Feb 18, 2025
Merged

Cherry-picks for 2.10.26-RC.4 #6520

merged 9 commits into from
Feb 18, 2025

Conversation

MauriceVanVeen and others added 8 commits February 18, 2025 14:17
Signed-off-by: Maurice van Veen <github@mauricevanveen.com>
Fixes: #6496

Signed-off-by: Yevhen Surovskyi <surovskyi.y@ajax.systems>
Signed-off-by: Maurice van Veen <github@mauricevanveen.com>
Signed-off-by: Maurice van Veen <github@mauricevanveen.com>
If the same queue group has members running on different leafnodes
connected through a gateway, it was possible for a message to be
delivered to several members running on different leaf nodes if
there was an interest (either plain subscription or for other queue
groups) that made the produce message travel through the gateway.

Signed-off-by: Ivan Kozlovic <ivan@synadia.com>
Signed-off-by: Maurice van Veen <github@mauricevanveen.com>
Partial backport of #6140 for v2.10.26+

`mset.ackMsg` could fail if the clustered stream is behind on applies on
this server, but the consumer's ack floor is ahead. In this case
`checkStateForInterestStream` would skip its check floor ahead, never
retrying to ack/remove this message again. Which would leave messages
around, not being removed even though they could be.

This PR is a partial backport, still doing `mset.ackMsg` for each
individual server instead of via message delete proposals for clustered
streams, but allowing to retry if a removal should be done.

Signed-off-by: Maurice van Veen <github@mauricevanveen.com>

Signed-off-by: Maurice van Veen <github@mauricevanveen.com>
Signed-off-by: Neil Twigg <neil@nats.io>
Co-authored-by: Neil Twigg <neil@nats.io>
@neilalexander neilalexander requested a review from a team as a code owner February 18, 2025 14:27
Copy link
Member

@derekcollison derekcollison left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM

Signed-off-by: Maurice van Veen <github@mauricevanveen.com>
@neilalexander neilalexander merged commit 612b7a9 into release/v2.10.26 Feb 18, 2025
4 of 5 checks passed
@neilalexander neilalexander deleted the neil/21026rc4 branch February 18, 2025 15:56
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