[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARTEMIS-3556?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Erwin Dondorp updated ARTEMIS-3556:
-----------------------------------
Description:
When browsing messages in the Artemis Console, the page does not show the
message protocol type. Expert users could derive that information from the
available message keys, but there is no formal indication of the message
protocol type.
Note that the message protocol type should not be confused with the message
payload type.
message protocol type is e.g.: CORE, AMQP, etc.
message payload type is e.g.: Text, Map, Stream, etc.
I have prepared a PR that shows the message protocol type in the "Headers"
table when viewing message details. The new field is "messageType". Due to the
list being alphabetic, it will show up just below "messageID".
Instead of providing a descriptive text for each message type, I kept it simple
and used just the (short) java class name.
question: should the existing field "type" be renamed to "payloadType" to
prevent any confusion? I updated the descriptive text for "type" to better
describe it.
The following class diagram shows which message types may be shown:
!image-2021-11-05-23-07-36-340.png!
my guess is that only AMQPStandardMessage, AMQPLargeMessage, OpenwireMessage
and CoreMessage can occur.
sample:
!screenshot-1.png!
was:
When browsing messages in the Artemis Console, the page does not show the
message protocol type. Expert users could derive that information from the
available message keys, but there is no formal indication of the message
protocol type.
Note that the message protocol type should not be confused with the message
payload type.
message protocol type is e.g.: CORE, AMQP, etc.
message payload type is e.g.: Text, Map, Stream, etc.
I have prepared a PR that shows the message protocol type in the "Headers"
table when viewing message details. The new field is "messageType". due to the
list being alphabetic, it will show up just below "messageID".
I kept it simple. Instead of providing a descriptive text for each message
type, I've simply used the (short) java class name.
question: should the field "type" be renamed to "payloadType" to prevent any
confusion? I updated the descriptive text for "type" to better describe it.
The following class diagram shows which message types may be shown:
!image-2021-11-05-23-07-36-340.png!
> Artemis console shoud show the message (protocol) type
> ------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: ARTEMIS-3556
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARTEMIS-3556
> Project: ActiveMQ Artemis
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: Web Console
> Affects Versions: 2.20.0
> Reporter: Erwin Dondorp
> Priority: Minor
> Attachments: image-2021-11-05-23-07-36-340.png, screenshot-1.png
>
>
> When browsing messages in the Artemis Console, the page does not show the
> message protocol type. Expert users could derive that information from the
> available message keys, but there is no formal indication of the message
> protocol type.
> Note that the message protocol type should not be confused with the message
> payload type.
> message protocol type is e.g.: CORE, AMQP, etc.
> message payload type is e.g.: Text, Map, Stream, etc.
> I have prepared a PR that shows the message protocol type in the "Headers"
> table when viewing message details. The new field is "messageType". Due to
> the list being alphabetic, it will show up just below "messageID".
> Instead of providing a descriptive text for each message type, I kept it
> simple and used just the (short) java class name.
> question: should the existing field "type" be renamed to "payloadType" to
> prevent any confusion? I updated the descriptive text for "type" to better
> describe it.
> The following class diagram shows which message types may be shown:
> !image-2021-11-05-23-07-36-340.png!
> my guess is that only AMQPStandardMessage, AMQPLargeMessage, OpenwireMessage
> and CoreMessage can occur.
> sample:
> !screenshot-1.png!
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)
