If you downloaded my branch or the PR, the fix should be there now...
one way you can do is to use my fork, and download the branch replica: git remote add clebert https://github.com/clebertsuconic/activemq-artemis.git git fetch clebert git checkout clebert/replica -B replica I will merge it soon whenever I get a full pass on my CI. On Sat, Jul 16, 2022 at 1:07 PM Clebert Suconic <clebert.suco...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I closed your PR because I replaced it with another one. You should try that > one. > > You can still access your PR. > > On Sat, Jul 16, 2022 at 12:18 PM Jan Šmucr <jan.sm...@aimtecglobal.com> wrote: >> >> Ah, nope. My PR has been closed. :/ I’ll try locally then. >> >> Ok, my 2 cents: >> >> The proper Groovy way of doing >> >> try { >> configuration.setGlobalMaxMessages(10); >> } catch (Exception ignored) { >> configuration.setGlobalMaxSize(10 * 1024); >> } >> >> would be >> >> if (configuration.metaClass.hasMetaProperty("globalMaxMessages")) { >> configuration.globalMaxMessages = 10 >> } else { >> configuration.globalMaxSize = 10 * 1024 >> } >> >> Jan >> >> From: Jan Šmucr<mailto:jan.sm...@aimtecglobal.com> >> Sent: sobota 16. července 2022 18:00 >> To: dev@activemq.apache.org<mailto:dev@activemq.apache.org> >> Subject: RE: Help with ARTEMIS-3767 >> >> Works with my tests. Let’s see if it builds. >> >> Jan >> >> From: Clebert Suconic<mailto:clebert.suco...@gmail.com> >> Sent: sobota 16. července 2022 5:29 >> To: dev@activemq.apache.org<mailto:dev@activemq.apache.org> >> Subject: Re: Help with ARTEMIS-3767 >> >> The test I wrote is actually failing with 2.17. >> >> I will check on Monday. But the idea is already there >> >> >> If you can figure out what I did wrong it would be a great help. But I can >> wait for the release. >> >> >> Let’s talk on Monday. >> On Fri, Jul 15, 2022 at 4:52 PM Clebert Suconic <clebert.suco...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >> > I'm particular confused if I should make the check on < 2_18 or <= 2_18 >> > >> > >> > I'm adding a test on 2.17 and 2.18 just to be sure... depending on >> > failures I will change the < or <= >> > >> > On Fri, Jul 15, 2022 at 4:24 PM Jan Šmucr <jan.sm...@aimtecglobal.com> >> > wrote: >> > > >> > > Thank you very much. I appreciate it. I'll post some feedback tomorrow. >> > > >> > > Jan >> > > >> > > Dne 15. 7. 2022 22:05 napsal uživatel Clebert Suconic < >> > clebert.suco...@gmail.com>: >> > > I have sent a new PR: >> > https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/4150 >> > > >> > > >> > > I have sent a release HEADS up to early next week. if we fix this >> > > issue it would go right on time for the 2.24.0 release. >> > > >> > > (@Jan: I would appreciate your feedback on the PR) >> > > >> > > On Fri, Jul 15, 2022 at 3:12 PM Clebert Suconic >> > > <clebert.suco...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > > > >> > > > ... and I always thought replication would always be used within the >> > > > same server. >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > Recently we added a test on replication versioning (compatibility >> > test). >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > I will see what I can do with the versioning. >> > > > >> > > > On Fri, Jul 15, 2022 at 11:43 AM Robbie Gemmell >> > > > <robbie.gemm...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > > > > >> > > > > Perhaps, I didnt go looking at the year old commits to see the >> > > > > relative sequence of when it changed. The problem being raised wasnt >> > > > > that the particular PR didnt change the version though (albeit the >> > > > > version either already had, or subsequently did change, which I was >> > > > > simply noting in case it wasnt already clear to Jan). Instead its >> > that >> > > > > it changed that packet contents without adding a new packet version, >> > > > > and its being said that the old server cant handle the new data now >> > > > > being sent in the old packet, and also that the new server cant >> > handle >> > > > > the absence of the new data that the old server obviously doesnt know >> > > > > about to send it. >> > > > > >> > > > > Which or both of those is true I dont know. I do recall other similar >> > > > > cases before of suggesting not sending new fields to old servers, and >> > > > > being told it shouldnt matter as theyd simply not use it, though >> > > > > personally I argued it still should never be sent to them as then it >> > > > > definitely cant cause any change in behaviour. >> > > > > >> > > > > On Fri, 15 Jul 2022 at 16:00, Clebert Suconic < >> > clebert.suco...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > > > > > >> > > > > > as far as I know that PR did not make a switch in the protocol >> > version >> > > > > > because there was already another change in there for the same >> > > > > > version... right? >> > > > > > >> > > > > > On Fri, Jul 15, 2022 at 6:07 AM Robbie Gemmell < >> > robbie.gemm...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > This isnt an area I know about but what I vaguely recalled/can >> > see is >> > > > > > > that there was coincidentally a wire version bump in 2.18.0 as >> > part of >> > > > > > > other changes, see the ARTEMIS_2_18_0_VERSION constant in >> > PacketImpl. >> > > > > > > From that I would guess it should be possible for newer servers >> > to >> > > > > > > specifically tell whether they are connected to <=2.17.0 or >= >> > > > > > > 2.18.0. Perhaps the new one could then handle the situation in >> > some >> > > > > > > way if the issue can be fixed from the new side only, by >> > changing what >> > > > > > > it sends and expects in the existing packet? >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > If it can be handled that way, I doubt there would be appetite >> > for >> > > > > > > releasing fixes across all the superceded intermediate versions >> > rather >> > > > > > > than just the latest. It doesnt appear to be widely hit so far in >> > > > > > > nearly a year, people using only any versions >=2.18.0 wont be >> > > > > > > affected, and anyone not yet affected could become so should use >> > a >> > > > > > > more recent fixed release (or else can patch the old superceded >> > > > > > > intermediate release with the fix themselves). >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > On Fri, 15 Jul 2022 at 09:57, Jan Šmucr < >> > jan.sm...@aimtecglobal.com> wrote: >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > Dear devs, >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > I'd like to ask you for help with the communication >> > incompatibility between pre-2.18.0 servers and the newer ones. What I've >> > learned so far is that in 2.18.0 there's been a change in the >> > REPLICATION_START_FINISH_SYNC packet, yet no new version of that packet has >> > been introduced. There have been some additional data appended to that >> > packet, so that newer servers expect older servers to send more data than >> > they actually do, and older servers can't cope with the additional data >> > they receive. The fact that until now nobody noticed that replication >> > between pre-2.18.0 and post-2.18.0 does not work confuses me a little. >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > Before learning the actual reason of the incompatibility, I >> > have developed a test which would eventually pass after the issue has been >> > fixed. But now I see that fixing it would mean releasing a set of at least >> > five minor bugfix releases. Shall I even attempt? If not, will you accept >> > at least the test suite so that nothing like that happens in the future? >> > Also mentioning the incompatibility somewhere might help others as >> > unfortunate as me. >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > The WIP PR is here: >> > https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/4144 >> > > > > > > > [ >> > https://opengraph.githubassets.com/1fef362275960b2364da60ecddb76ca361b56b67aca157a2a2d25e3145d32d99/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/4144 >> > ]<https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/4144> >> > > > > > > > ARTEMIS-3767 Fix replication incompatibility between pre >> > 2.18.0 and SNAPSHOT (WIP) by jsmucr · Pull Request #4144 · >> > apache/activemq-artemis< >> > https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/4144><https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/4144%3e> >> > > > > > > > This PR attempts to solve the issue described in >> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARTEMIS-3767. TL;DR replication >> > between =<2.17.0 and newer Artemis versions is broken since 2.18.0. >> > > > > > > > github.com >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > Thanks for your suggestions. >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > Jan >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > -- >> > > > > > Clebert Suconic >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > -- >> > > > Clebert Suconic >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > -- >> > > Clebert Suconic >> > >> > >> > >> > -- >> > Clebert Suconic >> > >> -- >> Clebert Suconic >> >> > -- > Clebert Suconic -- Clebert Suconic
