Add a configurable limit for number of exchanges (backport #14304) #14339
Conversation
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
This is like @SimonUnge's past work for vhosts and queues but for limiting the total number of exchanges.
Vhosts and queues are more expensive since they run processes while exchanges are just metadata. A limit would be good for exchanges too though, because if you create a really large number of them you can increase the memory footprint by quite a bit - through taking more space in the metadata store and making more work for monitoring. By default the limit is unset and it can be enabled with
cluster_exchange_limit = 100or explicitly disabled withcluster_exchange_limit = infinity, like the vhost limit.I've also added some small changes to the Khepri impls for
rabbit_db_exchange'scount/0andexists/1so that we use the projection ETS table rather than a query, to make this as cheap as possible.This is an automatic backport of pull request #14304 done by Mergify.