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

Handle different queue states on queue deletion from the management API more robustly #9925

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Nov 15, 2023

Conversation

Ayanda-D
Copy link
Contributor

Proposed Changes

We'd like to have queue deletion behaviour from the management API to also more robustly handle different queue states, similar to changes introduced to the cli here: #9324 (after prior issues faced in prod). This is an extension/update to #9550

Types of Changes

What types of changes does your code introduce to this project?
Put an x in the boxes that apply

  • Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes issue #NNNN)
  • New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
  • Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause an observable behavior change in existing systems)
  • Documentation improvements (corrections, new content, etc)
  • Cosmetic change (whitespace, formatting, etc)
  • Build system and/or CI

Checklist

Put an x in the boxes that apply.
You can also fill these out after creating the PR.
If you're unsure about any of them, don't hesitate to ask on the mailing list.
We're here to help!
This is simply a reminder of what we are going to look for before merging your code.

Further Comments

If this is a relatively large or complex change, kick off the discussion by explaining why you chose the solution you did and what alternatives you considered, etc.

@michaelklishin michaelklishin added this to the 3.13.0 milestone Nov 15, 2023
@michaelklishin michaelklishin merged commit edbf454 into rabbitmq:main Nov 15, 2023
12 checks passed
@michaelklishin
Copy link
Member

Thank you!

@Ayanda-D Ayanda-D deleted the robust-mgmt-api-queue-deletion branch November 16, 2023 09:58
@michaelklishin
Copy link
Member

FYI, #9550 is about to be reverted, which effectively affects this PR.

Replacing direct client's authorization checks ended up being not worth the gains (in #9550).

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.

2 participants