Replies: 1 comment 1 reply
-
|
Hey! I've looked into it and yes, this is definitely possible and I understand your use case; In case of workflows programmatic control over handler execution order with configurable error handling for automation makes sense. The current architecture already has the foundation for this with dynamic ordering and sequential execution. What you're asking for would involve allowing order to be set programmatically, parallel execution within same order groups, and configurable error handling options. I'm currently planning version 4 and I can push this feature in there as well. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
1 reply
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
-
With regard to handler ordering: https://github.com/litenova/LiteBus/wiki/Event-Module#handler-ordering
I was wondering if it would be possible to set the handler order dynamically instead of via attribute?
So if I wanted three handlers to fire first asynchronously (setting them all to 1) then having a second handler fire after that (order of 2) and then two other handlers to run asynchronously after that (order 3) and so on. The order of these needs to be programmatically set, so a user can decide all events must fire asynchronously (everything set to order 1) or everything must be fired in a well-defined order one after the next.
It would also need to be possible to decide if any failure prevents the next handlers from firing or if any previous handler errors are ignored and the pipeline continues.
I have a legitimate use case for this, setting up automation steps (the handlers) and events that need to trigger in a specific order. The handler can itself check if it's enabled to avoid further complexity in the pipeline/order setup but the following handlers need to be short-circuited in some cases but also be able to ignore previous handler errors in other cases.
Is this currently possible, on the road map or not planned at all?
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions