search

iron-io / iron_mq_ruby

Ruby library for IronMQ.
http://www.iron.io
BSD 2-Clause "Simplified" License
35 stars 17 forks source link

Messages do not get deleted from the iron.io hud #104

Closed perlun closed 8 years ago

perlun commented 8 years ago

Hi,

Trying different approaches here while updating our app server from using IronMQ v2 to v3. But: neither by using the queue.poll(wait:30) do ... end approach or when doing queue.reserve(wait: 30, delete: true) can I get the "message count" on the iron.io hud to decrease once the message has been consumed. Which I find odd.

I do not seem to be getting the same message over and over again, it's only received once... but it still feels odd. Any ideas what could be causing this? Using the latest v3 branch straight from this repo, since I was under the impression that I had to (but now I noted that it seems like the latest released version uses & supports v3 by default, which is what got me here in the first place...)

rdallman commented 8 years ago

hi @perlun can you send in a request to support@iron.io so we can get your details in private and see what you are seeing. it sounds like you are not able to reserve any messages (sounds like delayed or reserved messages).

perlun commented 8 years ago

OK, will do.

perlun commented 8 years ago

Btw, is this info on the README page correct?

We don't have v3 in rubygems yet

I get the impression that v6.0.1 is IronMQ v3 only, whereas v5.0.1 supports v2. Is that right? If so, we should definitely update the README since it is extremely misleading as it is now. (All of this started in our case by upgrading to v6.0.1 by mistake, causing everything to break down...)

rdallman commented 8 years ago

Hey @perlun, looked into this and it seems you're referencing an old README from https://github.com/iron-io/iron_mq_ruby/commit/5bb6c2dcb8c03471b7c339ba2ac741338942ee20 . Yes, IronMQ v3 is 6.x+ and IronMQ v2 is 5.x. Was the issue here in using 6.x vs a v2 api or 5.x vs a v3 api ? I'm not sure I understand the README issue, apologies, it seems we have made the correct updates to it wrt rubygems.

perlun commented 8 years ago

Yeah, you're right - I targeted the wrong branch in that commit. Should have been v3. The README in that branch is confusing, since it says that "this is not released to Rubygems yet" which is in fact is (the v6) - which I realized was the cause of my problem. (unintentional update to v6...)

Is the v3 branch even used any more, or has it been superseded by the master branch now? If so, I strongly suggest we annihilate it; if not, then I think someone needs to step up and explain what the point is with these two branches.

rdallman commented 8 years ago

Hey @perlun I agree, it is a source of confusion. The only reason I can think of for leaving the v3 branch would be to not break people's CI systems, but at the same time I think there could be an argument for doing so since I believe we moved all documentation over to say 'master' for v3. I checked some of the other language bindings and they all appear to still have an explicit 'v3' branch even after merging into master. Since we're no longer updating the branches, I think we should delete them all; I think leaving them was just incidental. I'll raise an internal issue to go about deleting all the v3 branches and see if any other issues are raised around their removal before carrying out this one.

Thanks again for all of the feedback