Update Priority Queue Cloud Pattern #122
Conversation
Update to .NET 8.0 Updated README
skabou
force-pushed
the
priority-queue-update
branch
from
c57c76c
to
617a48f
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Summary:
- Use Entra ID
- Use new Azure SDK dependency injection model
- How do we get this to not just be a pub-sub example?
- Use bicep for the azure resource deployments
That third item is worrying me a bit, not sure how best to proceed. Would be glad to talk it over w/ ya!
| RESOURCE_GROUP_NAME=rg-priority-queue | ||
| az group create -n $RESOURCE_GROUP_NAME -l eastus2 | ||
| ``` | ||
| 1. Provision a Service Bus messaging namespace. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
For the Service Bus deployment, can you just wrap this all in a simple bicep file to do a one-step deployment? You can still use the command to get the connection string at the end.
|
|
||
| 1. Set the `PriorityQueueSender` project as startup. | ||
| 1. Press F5 in Visual Studio to start running the example. The function will begin sending messages to the topic every 30 seconds. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Might be good to mention that it sends a mix of high and low priority messages.
| 1. Edit the `local.settings.json` file for each project set the value of `ServiceBusConnectionString` to the **SERVICE_BUS_CONNECTION_STRING** retained from earlier. | ||
|
|
||
| 1. Set the `PriorityQueueSender` project as startup. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
can we just func start this? Then we wouldn't need Visual Studio installed (we're getting to the point that we either just use CLI or VSCode -- Visual Studio is "a bit much" for samples.
| 1. Press F5 in Visual Studio to start the execution of the consumer function. | ||
| 1. In the Azure Functions Core Tools Console, you can view the diagnostic information generated by statements in the code. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Same here, if we have the core tools installed then func start should work for us.
| .ConfigureFunctionsWorkerDefaults() | ||
| .ConfigureAppConfiguration((hostingContext, config) => | ||
| { | ||
| config.AddJsonFile("local.settings.json", optional: true, reloadOnChange: true); | ||
| }) | ||
| .ConfigureServices(services => | ||
| { | ||
| var configuration = services.BuildServiceProvider().GetRequiredService<IConfiguration>(); | ||
|
|
||
| services.AddSingleton(configuration); | ||
|
|
||
| services.AddSingleton<ServiceBusClient>(sp => | ||
| { | ||
| var connectionString = configuration.GetValue<string>("ServiceBusConnectionString"); | ||
| return new ServiceBusClient(connectionString); | ||
| }); | ||
| }) | ||
| .Build(); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Can this get converted to:
services.AddAzureClients(cb => {
cb.AddServiceBusClient(...)
});https://learn.microsoft.com/azure/azure-functions/dotnet-isolated-process-guide?tabs=linux#register-azure-clients -- The PG is trying to get folks to use this model for Azure SDK clients intead of the custom approach like you have here.
| public PriorityQueueConsumerHighFn(ILogger<PriorityQueueConsumerHighFn> logger) | ||
| { | ||
| _logger = logger; | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Can you convert to automatic constructor?
| <None Update="local.settings.json"> | ||
| <CopyToOutputDirectory>PreserveNewest</CopyToOutputDirectory> | ||
| <CopyToPublishDirectory>Never</CopyToPublishDirectory> | ||
| </None> | ||
| </ItemGroup> | ||
| </Project> | ||
| <ItemGroup> | ||
| <PackageReference Include="Microsoft.Azure.Functions.Worker.Extensions.Http" Version="3.1.0" /> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is Http a requirement for something here? I thought that was only for Http triggers?
| <None Update="local.settings.json"> | ||
| <CopyToOutputDirectory>PreserveNewest</CopyToOutputDirectory> | ||
| <CopyToPublishDirectory>Never</CopyToPublishDirectory> | ||
| </None> | ||
| </ItemGroup> | ||
| </Project> | ||
| <ItemGroup> | ||
| <PackageReference Include="Microsoft.Azure.Functions.Worker.Extensions.Http" Version="3.1.0" /> |
| public PriorityQueueConsumerLowFn(ILogger<PriorityQueueConsumerLowFn> logger) | ||
| { | ||
| _logger = logger; | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Can you convert to automatic constructor?
| 1. Set the `PriorityQueueSender` project as startup. | ||
| 1. Press F5 in Visual Studio to start running the example. The function will begin sending messages to the topic every 30 seconds. | ||
| 1. Stop the execution, change the startup project to either the `PriorityQueueConsumerHigh` or `PriorityQueueConsumerLow`. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm not seeing how running this locally is really showing priority queues. Since both appear to be doing equal processing. There really isn't even any host.json settings to help show (e.g. maxConcurrentSessions only works for session-based access and maxMessageBatchSize only works for array input bindings). I know when deployed to Azure you can tweak instance count, but the steps here don't really seem to match what is stated at the start of the page. Maybe this sample should only have a "deploy to azure" approach so that this is actually demonstrating the pattern? Right now, it's just a pub-sub processing demo.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@skabou - what did we say next steps were about this?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@ckittel - I have a new version in the works (deploys via bicep file) - Trying to get the PR in before the end of the month. My concern is the example is still "more or less the same" as to what is there - Essentially two pub subs, one for high priority, and one for low priority. If we don't think publishing a demo of that is worthwhile then I could scrap the code portion.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
If it's an implementation of the pattern as we have it documented/described, I think it will be useful. If you don't feel though it's an implementation of the pattern, then we need to re-evaluate for sure. I think if your new version does a deploy to azure for sure, then we can show the pattern very clearly with the scale-out settings.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I do think it's still worthwhile to demonstrate.
Update to .NET 8.0
Updated README