feat: queue #430
feat: queue #430
Conversation
| handler: QueueHandler; | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| class Queue extends Construct implements IQueue { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't see it implementing any of the IQueue methods?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
IQueue is just properties (above)?
| return call.arguments.length === 3 || call.arguments.length === 4; | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
| return false; | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| /** | ||
| * A heuristic for identifying a {@link CallExpression} that is a call to an `on` handler. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Curious why you decided to allow multiple consumers?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
ohh, this is changed, forgot to change the infer.
| @@ -38,6 +38,7 @@ export function createTransactionWorker( | |||
| const propertyRetriever = new AllPropertyRetriever({ | |||
| BucketPhysicalName: unsupportedPropertyRetriever, | |||
| OpenSearchClient: unsupportedPropertyRetriever, | |||
| QueuePhysicalName: unsupportedPropertyRetriever, | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Why is this unsupported in this context?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Same reason as bucket physical name, the current support for these are through the client, which we don't currently inject into the transaction worker. Would need to decouple the physical name calculation (and overrides) from the client first.
| } | ||
|
|
||
| /** | ||
| * TODO: implement message deduplication |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Issue or do? Seems straightforward?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I guess the hard part is the content based deduplication
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The issue is the time window, but may not be hard to do. Save all of the values/hashes with a date, separated by group for fifo. Ignore messages with the same value/hash until the time is up.
Config:
Client-side APIs:
Tasks: