gvsafronov/futriix
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Actions 1 Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

Make comment about nack->consumer test for minidle more obvious.

Browse Source 
Related to #5437.
This commit is contained in:
antirez 2018-10-15 12:01:17 +02:00
parent 0b1784b188
commit 3640e029d6
1 changed files with 4 additions and 2 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

6
src/t_stream.c
View File

@ -2169,8 +2169,10 @@ void xclaimCommand(client *c) {
if (nack != raxNotFound) { if (nack != raxNotFound) {
/* We need to check if the minimum idle time requested /* We need to check if the minimum idle time requested
* by the caller is satisfied by this entry. * by the caller is satisfied by this entry.
* Note that if nack->consumer is NULL, means the NACK *
* is created by FORCE, we should ignore minidle. */ * Note that the nack could be created by FORCE, in this
* case there was no pre-existing entry and minidle should
* be ignored, but in that case nick->consumer is NULL. */
if (nack->consumer && minidle) { if (nack->consumer && minidle) {
mstime_t this_idle = now - nack->delivery_time; mstime_t this_idle = now - nack->delivery_time;
if (this_idle < minidle) continue; if (this_idle < minidle) continue;