-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 0
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
253 implement fault tolerance mechanisms eg retries dead letter queues circuit breakers e5 #280
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
Have you implemented the circuit breaker logic? I didn't see it. |
crates/web-plugins/didcomm-messaging/protocols/forward/src/handler.rs
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
crates/web-plugins/didcomm-messaging/protocols/forward/src/handler.rs
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
crates/web-plugins/didcomm-messaging/protocols/mediator-coordination/src/handler/stateful.rs
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
crates/web-plugins/didcomm-messaging/protocols/mediator-coordination/src/handler/stateful.rs
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
crates/web-plugins/didcomm-messaging/protocols/pickup/src/handler.rs
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
@IngridPuppet Please the test on the pickup are very slow and are not working correctly please can you help me to solve that |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think it's good to go 🚀
…olerance-mechanisms-eg-retries-dead-letter-queues-circuit-breakers-e5
…olerance-mechanisms-eg-retries-dead-letter-queues-circuit-breakers-e5
…breakers management
…d-letter-queues-circuit-breakers-e5' of https://github.com/adorsys/didcomm-mediator-rs into 253-implement-fault-tolerance-mechanisms-eg-retries-dead-letter-queues-circuit-breakers-e5
…olerance-mechanisms-eg-retries-dead-letter-queues-circuit-breakers-e5
let next = checks( | ||
&message, | ||
&repository.connection_repository, | ||
state.circuit_breaker.get(MEDIATE_FORWARD_2_0).as_deref(), |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Here, if the circuit breaker is not correctly configured, the fallback (None)
could skip validation. This could unintentionally bypass safety checks.
suggestion
Add logging or a fallback mechanism that fails securely if the circuit breaker is misconfigured.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
What do you mean? The circuit has nothing to do with the checks logic. Take a look at the checks
function implementation.
@Hermann-Core @Christiantyemele @IngridPuppet