## What changed?
Add last message id in the DLQ ListQueues response. Use this last
message id in merge DLQ command if it is not provided by the user.
## Why?
tdbg dlq merge command has an optional argument --last-message-id. If
this is not provided, the system workflow created for this task will
merge/purge messages until the DLQ is empty.
This can create a loop that will not end. If the underlying issue that
pushed the messages to DLQ is still around, the newly merged tasks will
again get added to DLQ. The system workflow will proceed to merge this
task again. This can go in an infinite loop.
## How did you test it?
- [x] built
- [ ] run locally and tested manually
- [x] covered by existing tests
- [x] added new unit test(s)
- [ ] added new functional test(s)
## What changed?
<!-- Describe what has changed in this PR -->
Remove license header from every file. Because it is really hard to
follow in this PR here is the summary:
1. License header is removed from all `.go` and `.proto` files
:fireworks::fireworks:🎆.
2. `LICENSE` file in the root directory has only Temporal and Uber
copyrights.
3. 5 other `LICENSE` files added to the packages which have copyrights
different from Temporal and Uber: Datadog, Xargin, "Mat Ryer, Tyler
Bunnell and contributors".
4. `license_file` flag is removed from all code generation tools.
5. `copyright_file` flag is removed from `go:generate mockgen`
directive.
6. All copyright related targets are removed from `Makefile`.
7. Updated Temporal copyright year to 2025 everywhere.
## Why?
<!-- Tell your future self why have you made these changes -->
I double checked with legal department that it is not needed to have
license header in every file. One file per repo is enough. I put all
copyrights to the root `LICENSE` file and removed header from all other
files. Also updated tools and `Makefile`.
## What changed?
Make import formatting a part of the build, and test validity with
"ensure-no-changes" target
## Why?
So we never discuss import order again (hopefully)
## How did you test it?
its a build change, so the build will test it!
## Potential risks
As long as build works, the only thing I risk is the ire of coworker who
want imports to be different ;)
## Documentation
N/A
## Is hotfix candidate?
No
<!-- Describe what has changed in this PR -->
**What changed?**
Adding a new field MessageCount to ListQueues response.
<!-- Tell your future self why have you made these changes -->
**Why?**
This field will be useful for operators who wants to get details about
DLQs
<!-- How have you verified this change? Tested locally? Added a unit
test? Checked in staging env? -->
**How did you test it?**
Unit tests with 100% test coverage.
<!-- Assuming the worst case, what can be broken when deploying this
change to production? -->
**Potential risks**
<!-- Is this PR a hotfix candidate or require that a notification be
sent to the broader community? (Yes/No) -->
**Is hotfix candidate?**
<!-- Describe what has changed in this PR -->
**What changed?**
Adding ListQueues API to QueueV2 and implementing it for Cassandra and
SQL
<!-- Tell your future self why have you made these changes -->
**Why?**
This API can be used by operators to list different types of queues
including DLQs.
<!-- How have you verified this change? Tested locally? Added a unit
test? Checked in staging env? -->
**How did you test it?**
Unit tests with 100% coverage.
<!-- Assuming the worst case, what can be broken when deploying this
change to production? -->
**Potential risks**
<!-- Is this PR a hotfix candidate or require that a notification be
sent to the broader community? (Yes/No) -->
**Is hotfix candidate?**
<!-- Describe what has changed in this PR -->
**What changed?**
Adding DescribeDLQJob and CancelDLQJob APIs to admin_handler.
<!-- Tell your future self why have you made these changes -->
**Why?**
DescribeDLQJob API will be used by operators to find the status of a DLQ
job such as MergeDLQTasks or PurgeDLQTasks.
CancelDLQJob API will be used by operators to delete a Merge or Purge
DLQ task.
a command will be added to tdbg to call these API. End users will be
using tdbg to invoke these APIs.
<!-- How have you verified this change? Tested locally? Added a unit
test? Checked in staging env? -->
**How did you test it?**
Unit tests
<!-- Assuming the worst case, what can be broken when deploying this
change to production? -->
**Potential risks**
<!-- Is this PR a hotfix candidate or require that a notification be
sent to the broader community? (Yes/No) -->
**Is hotfix candidate?**
<!-- Describe what has changed in this PR -->
**What changed?**
Adding FOR UPDATE clause when fetching queueV2 metadata and removing
unused field version from queue metadata.
<!-- Tell your future self why have you made these changes -->
**Why?**
If a queueV2 metadata row is fetched in a transaction, we have to place
a lock on that row
to avoid another transaction reading from that line. This can happen
when two threads are trying to
delete messages from the queue. Two of them will update queue metadata
and write it back. This will lead
to a race condition. By adding 'FOR UPDATE' SQL clause, the first
transaction will get an exclusive lock
on the row. The second transaction will wait until the first transaction
is complete or rollback.
Also, removing the version field from QueueV2 metadata table. We will
not be using this field since we are using sql transactions.
<!-- How have you verified this change? Tested locally? Added a unit
test? Checked in staging env? -->
**How did you test it?**
Unit test. Executed through the debugger to make sure
SelectFromQueueV2MetadataForUpdate() is called instead of
SelectFromQueueV2Metadata() when executed inside a trancation.
<!-- Assuming the worst case, what can be broken when deploying this
change to production? -->
**Potential risks**
<!-- Is this PR a hotfix candidate or require that a notification be
sent to the broader community? (Yes/No) -->
**Is hotfix candidate?**
<!-- Describe what has changed in this PR -->
**What changed?**
Adding RangeDeleteMessages() and CreateQueue() methods for SQL version
of persistence.QueueV2, which supersedes the persistence.Queue
interface.
<!-- Tell your future self why have you made these changes -->
**Why?**
We plan on using this for the upcoming history task DLQ project.
<!-- How have you verified this change? Tested locally? Added a unit
test? Checked in staging env? -->
**How did you test it?**
Unit tests. Code has 100% unit test coverage.
<!-- Assuming the worst case, what can be broken when deploying this
change to production? -->
**Potential risks**
<!-- Is this PR a hotfix candidate or require that a notification be
sent to the broader community? (Yes/No) -->
**Is hotfix candidate?**
---------
Co-authored-by: Michael Snowden <[email protected]>
<!-- Describe what has changed in this PR -->
**What changed?**
Adding EnqueueMessage() and ReadMessage() methods for SQL version of
persistence.QueueV2, which supersedes the persistence.Queue interface.
The implementations for delete and merge are left out for now and will
be implemented later.
<!-- Tell your future self why have you made these changes -->
**Why?**
We plan on using this for the upcoming history task DLQ project.
<!-- How have you verified this change? Tested locally? Added a unit
test? Checked in staging env? -->
**How did you test it?**
Unit tests.
<!-- Assuming the worst case, what can be broken when deploying this
change to production? -->
**Potential risks**
<!-- Is this PR a hotfix candidate or require that a notification be
sent to the broader community? (Yes/No) -->
**Is hotfix candidate?**
