nsqd: log errors if no nsqlookupd broadcast address - #839
Merged
Conversation
Member
I struggled with that, agreed that it's awkward but not sure how important it is to fix. I think this is a useful addition, thanks. |
This file contains hidden or 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
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
another piece to fix #826
When using nsqlookupd with no explicit broadcast address, and without the fix in #837, it looks like this:
I think the
ErrListused inGetLookupdTopicChannels()is a bit awkward. It turns into a multi-line error string. And if all lookupd requests experienced an error, it pre-formats it into a plain Error with a multi-line string.The only other user of GetLookupdTopicChannels(), nsqadmin, ignores the error completely. So maybe the thing to do is have GetLookupdTopicChannels log the errors itself, maybe with a customizable prefix or using a callback ... yeah that sounds pretty messy too, but the current situation could use some kind of refactoring IMHO. Or we could just add these messages and punt :)