New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
ADR-0009 proxy message factory. #544
base: develop
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## develop #544 +/- ##
=============================================
- Coverage 91.24% 91.20% -0.05%
+ Complexity 12023 12014 -9
=============================================
Files 1186 1186
Lines 33146 33135 -11
Branches 2320 2320
=============================================
- Hits 30244 30220 -24
- Misses 2405 2416 +11
- Partials 497 499 +2 Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
The more I think about this, the more I think that while a mutable message factory might be useful generically, it may not be useful at all in this particular use-case since effectively there's 4 IOPS costs
By having a s3-readonly-factory we only semi-avoid the disk IOPS which may not be the "high cost", unless we have repeated operations. Equally if we look to the javadocs for S3 SDK, then we will probably ultimately end up calling
|
Motivation
There is a specific use-case where Interlok may have possibly been the wrong choice. It's essentially behaving as a passthrough stream of data into Elasticsearch. It's arguable that this is the wrong approach but
What can we do to mitigate the IOPS cost that happens when we download an S3 blob and then essentially call some other relatively expensive operation with the contents of the blob.
Pre Merge : https://github.com/adaptris/interlok/blob/ADR-0009-mutable-messages/docs/adr/0009-mutable-messages.md
Post Merge : https://github.com/adaptris/interlok/blob/develop/docs/adr/0009-mutable-messages.md