Skip to content

Conversation

@geoand
Copy link
Contributor

@geoand geoand commented Jun 10, 2024

This is needed because WebsocketConnectionBuilder might be configured with a non NioEventLoopGroup

Relates to: quarkusio/quarkus#41082

This is needed because WebsocketConnectionBuilder might be configured with a non NioEventLoopGroup Relates to: quarkusio/quarkus#41082
@quarkus-bot
Copy link

quarkus-bot bot commented Jun 10, 2024

Status for workflow Build

This is the status report for running Build on commit 69ec225.

Failing Jobs

Status Name Step Failures Logs Raw logs
✔️ Build - JDK 11 Logs Raw logs
Build - JDK 17 Build with Maven Failures Logs Raw logs

Full information is available in the Build summary check run.

Failures

⚙️ Build - JDK 17 #

- Failing: servlet  ! Skipped: websocket websocket/core websocket/servlet and 1 more

📦 servlet

io.undertow.servlet.test.dispatcher.DispatcherForwardTestCase.testPathBasedInclude line 137 - More details - Source on GitHub

org.junit.ComparisonFailure: expected:<...etContext/dispatch /[dispatch]> but was:<...etContext/dispatch /[forward]>	at org.junit.Assert.assertEquals(Assert.java:117)	at org.junit.Assert.assertEquals(Assert.java:146)	at io.undertow.servlet.test.dispatcher.DispatcherForwardTestCase.testPathBasedInclude(DispatcherForwardTestCase.java:137)	at java.base/jdk.internal.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke0(Native Method)	at java.base/jdk.internal.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(NativeMethodAccessorImpl.java:77)	at java.base/jdk.internal.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.java:43)	at java.base/java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:568) 
@geoand
Copy link
Contributor Author

geoand commented Jun 10, 2024

I am pretty sure the test failure has nothing to do with this change

return eventLoopGroup;
}
// there is not much else we can do here...
return new NioEventLoopGroup();
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I agree, but it's unfortunate. We should add a note in the Quarkus documentation when using the legacy web socket implementation; native transport is not recommended.

@geoand
Copy link
Contributor Author

geoand commented Jun 10, 2024

I have verified that the CI failure is present in main as well.

@cescoffier cescoffier merged commit f63d348 into main Jun 11, 2024
@gsmet gsmet deleted the quarkus-#41082 branch August 7, 2024 11:42
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

3 participants