fix conflicting timestamp #68
Conversation
WalkthroughThe pull request introduces enhancements to the message processing and timestamp generation mechanisms. A new test function Changes
Sequence DiagramsequenceDiagram
participant Timestamp Generator
participant Message Handler
Timestamp Generator->>Timestamp Generator: Generate Current Timestamp
alt Timestamp is Same as Last
Timestamp Generator->>Timestamp Generator: Increment Timestamp
end
Timestamp Generator-->>Message Handler: Unique Timestamp
Message Handler->>Message Handler: Process Batch
Poem
✨ Finishing Touches
🪧 TipsChatThere are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:
Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments. CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)
Other keywords and placeholders
CodeRabbit Configuration File (
|
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
🧹 Nitpick comments (3)
types/time.go (1)
14-15: Document or renamelastTimestampto clarify usage.
To improve maintainability, add comments describing the purpose oflastTimestampand how it is intended to prevent timestamp collisions.executor/host/handler_test.go (2)
405-405: Correct minor typo in the comment.
Change “buch” to “bunch.” This small fix improves readability.- // append a buch of messages to the msg queue + // append a bunch of messages to the msg queue
420-427: Resolve contradictory comment regarding timestamps.
The code checks for collisions and fails the test if two consecutive batches have the same timestamp, but the comment says “Verify that at least one of the batches has the same timestamp.” Consider updating the comment to accurately reflect the test's logic of ensuring that no collisions occur.
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
📒 Files selected for processing (2)
executor/host/handler_test.go(3 hunks)types/time.go(1 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments (1)
types/time.go (1)
5-6: Consider concurrency safety for the global variable.
Using a global variable without synchronization can lead to data races ifCurrentNanoTimestampis called from multiple goroutines. Anatomicorsync.Mutexapproach can help ensure thread-safety.Would you like me to generate a shell script to search the entire codebase for concurrent invocations of
CurrentNanoTimestamp?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
🧹 Nitpick comments (1)
types/time.go (1)
8-9: Consider making package variables unexported.Since
lastTimestampandtsMutexare package-internal implementation details, they should follow Go conventions and be unexported (lowercase).-var lastTimestamp int64 -var tsMutex = sync.Mutex{} +var lastTimestamp int64 +var tsMutex = sync.Mutex{}
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
📒 Files selected for processing (1)
types/time.go(1 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments (2)
types/time.go (2)
13-21: Consider using atomic operations for better performance.In high-frequency scenarios, mutex locking could become a performance bottleneck. Consider using atomic operations instead.
-var lastTimestamp int64 -var tsMutex = sync.Mutex{} +var lastTimestamp atomic.Int64 var CurrentNanoTimestamp = func() int64 { - tsMutex.Lock() - defer tsMutex.Unlock() res := time.Now().UTC().UnixNano() - if res == lastTimestamp { + last := lastTimestamp.Load() + if res <= last { - res++ + res = last + 1 } - lastTimestamp = res + lastTimestamp.Store(res) return res }
15-18: Handle edge cases in timestamp generation.The current implementation has potential edge cases:
- Integer overflow when
resis at max int64- System clock adjustments could cause time to go backwards
Consider adding checks for these scenarios.
res := time.Now().UTC().UnixNano() if res == lastTimestamp { res++ + // Check for overflow + if res < 0 { + res = lastTimestamp + } } +// Handle backwards time +if res < lastTimestamp { + res = lastTimestamp + 1 +}
Summary by CodeRabbit
New Features
Tests
The changes improve system reliability by preventing timestamp collisions and expanding test scenarios for message processing.