Async for each handling

[wcrooy]

This PR contains the possibility to handle multiple records at the same time. Based on mem-usage the degree of parallelism can be set.

Let me know if you've got any further questions or remarks.

[Kralizek]

Hey @wcrooy!

Thank you for your PR. It's a really nice addition. I wonder whether these extensions should be in a side-package that can be added on the side. What do you think?

[wcrooy]

Hey @wcrooy!

Thank you for your PR. It's a really nice addition. I wonder whether these extensions should be in a side-package that can be added on the side. What do you think?

Hi @Kralizek.
You're welcome. I'm ok with both options. Though I think it's pretty close to the standard sqs / sns packages. Since it offers the user two flavours of initialize the processing of messages and notifications.

[wcrooy]

Hi @Kralizek ,
Is there anything I can do in assisting to get this PR through? Please let me know your thoughts.

Regards, Wouter

[Kralizek]

Hi @wcrooy, sorry. just busy these days. Is it urgent for you?

[wcrooy]

Hi, No problem! Thanks for even looking at it. 😊 Urgency is medium… From: Renato Golia <notifications@github.com> Sent: Wednesday, 13 May 2020 10:00 To: Kralizek/AWSLambdaSharpTemplate <AWSLambdaSharpTemplate@noreply.github.com> Cc: Wouter Crooy <Wouter.Crooy@albelli.com>; Mention <mention@noreply.github.com> Subject: Re: [Kralizek/AWSLambdaSharpTemplate] Async for each handling (#16) Hi @wcrooy<https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fwcrooy&data=02%7C01%7CWouter.Crooy%40albelli.com%7Ca02d8ba7817e40820be908d7f713a4c3%7C5ac5a0c03ee74848be5e226c80860f44%7C0%7C0%7C637249536061443779&sdata=fo8U%2Fy6ZHlFoVSuLcZcsYJ3ex%2FeawcxcDDmIx6Q7UOU%3D&reserved=0>, sorry. just busy these days. Is it urgent for you? — You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub<https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2FKralizek%2FAWSLambdaSharpTemplate%2Fpull%2F16%23issuecomment-627818252&data=02%7C01%7CWouter.Crooy%40albelli.com%7Ca02d8ba7817e40820be908d7f713a4c3%7C5ac5a0c03ee74848be5e226c80860f44%7C0%7C0%7C637249536061443779&sdata=7VLeF398J34KKG87nuqwYJi4G%2BIHOtJQ3XXqQLafYGY%3D&reserved=0>, or unsubscribe<https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fnotifications%2Funsubscribe-auth%2FACBWTJEKDNDD6MLRZBUGBQTRRJHQDANCNFSM4M3MNEPQ&data=02%7C01%7CWouter.Crooy%40albelli.com%7Ca02d8ba7817e40820be908d7f713a4c3%7C5ac5a0c03ee74848be5e226c80860f44%7C0%7C0%7C637249536061453738&sdata=%2F52p%2FtmztWEzLWsJpvwaXWY%2F1UTRb3OOdMXV9xRHkNA%3D&reserved=0>.

[Kralizek]

I'll try to work on it sometimes today. It generally looks really good.

[Kralizek]

@wcrooy do you think it's a correct assumption to say that if maxDegreeOfParallelism == 1 then we're basically running the sync version!

If so, we could merge the two extensions into one.

public static IServiceCollection UseNotificationHandler<TNotification, THandler>(this IServiceCollection services, int maxDegreeOfParallelism = 1)
    where TNotification : class
    where THandler : class, INotificationHandler<TNotification>
{
    if (maxDegreeOfParallelism <= 0)
    {
        throw new ArgumentOutOfRangeException(nameof(maxDegreeOfParallelism), $"{nameof(maxDegreeOfParallelism)} can't be less than 1");
    }

    if (maxDegreeOfParallelism > 1)
    {
        services.AddSingleton(new ForEachAsyncHandlingOption { MaxDegreeOfParallelism = maxDegreeOfParallelism });
        services.AddTransient<IEventHandler<SNSEvent>, SnsForEachAsyncEventHandler<TNotification>>();
    }
    else
    {
        services.AddTransient<IEventHandler<SNSEvent>, SnsEventHandler<TNotification>>();
    }

    services.AddTransient<INotificationHandler<TNotification>, THandler>();

    return services;
}

[Kralizek]

@wcrooy please review the changes I introduced in the latest commit. I think it makes a clearer API.

This is the idea:

// Non-parallel execution (implicit)
services.UseNotificationHandler<CustomNotification, CustomNotificationHandler>();

// Non-parallel execution (explicit)
services.UseNotificationHandler<CustomNotification, CustomNotificationHandler>(enableParallelExecution: false);

// Parallel execution, max parallelism set to available CPU count
services.UseNotificationHandler<CustomNotification, CustomNotificationHandler>(enableParallelExecution: true);

// Parallel execution, max parallelism set to specific value
services.ConfigureSnsParallelExecution(4);
services.UseNotificationHandler<CustomNotification, CustomNotificationHandler>(enableParallelExecution: true);

Similarly for SQS.

[wcrooy]

Yes! Thanks! I like them. :-)