Skip to content

Consumer start from stored offset #84

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

Merged
merged 6 commits into from
Mar 15, 2022

Conversation

simone-fariselli
Copy link
Contributor

  • Handling start from stored offset
  • Implemented test for feature: ShouldConsumeFromStoredOffset in ConsumerSystemTests.cs

@codecov-commenter
Copy link

codecov-commenter commented Mar 12, 2022

Codecov Report

Merging #84 (b957b11) into main (07251ae) will increase coverage by 0.12%.
The diff coverage is 100.00%.

❗ Current head b957b11 differs from pull request most recent head 208f569. Consider uploading reports for the commit 208f569 to get more accurate results

Impacted file tree graph

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main      #84      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   90.62%   90.75%   +0.12%     
==========================================
  Files          69       69              
  Lines        4535     4598      +63     
  Branches      265      268       +3     
==========================================
+ Hits         4110     4173      +63     
  Misses        366      366              
  Partials       59       59              
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
RabbitMQ.Stream.Client/Consumer.cs 93.40% <100.00%> (+0.38%) ⬆️
RabbitMQ.Stream.Client/Subscribe.cs 65.21% <100.00%> (+0.38%) ⬆️
Tests/ConsumerSystemTests.cs 100.00% <100.00%> (ø)

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 07251ae...208f569. Read the comment docs.

@Gsantomaggio Gsantomaggio self-assigned this Mar 14, 2022
@lukebakken lukebakken marked this pull request as draft March 14, 2022 15:02
@Gsantomaggio
Copy link
Member

Grazie @simone-fariselli
This is the fix for #83

@Gsantomaggio Gsantomaggio marked this pull request as ready for review March 15, 2022 10:16
@Gsantomaggio Gsantomaggio self-requested a review March 15, 2022 10:16
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants