Move namespace replication to own package #7112
Merged
+115
−113
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
7aaf73a to
d43a04b
Compare
stephanos
commented
Jan 17, 2025
Comment on lines
-265
to
-270
| // FailoverHistory returns the a copy of failover history for this namespace. | ||
| func (ns *Namespace) FailoverHistory() []*replicationpb.FailoverStatus { | ||
| return convertFailoverHistoryToReplicationProto( | ||
| ns.replicationConfig.GetFailoverHistory(), | ||
| ) | ||
| } |
d43a04b to
076fd45
Compare
alexshtin
approved these changes
Jan 17, 2025
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This DLQ is just for namespace replication queue. I believe it can go under nsreplication package.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
What changed?
Moved code from
common/namespacetocommon/namespace/nsreplication. Next to the existingcommon/namespace/nsregistry.Why?
The goal is to remove all references from
common/namespacetocommon/persistence. One step towards usingcommon/dynamicconfigfromcommon/namespace.How did you test it?
No behavior changes here.
Potential risks
Documentation
Is hotfix candidate?