1.x: fix timed replay() replaying old data for late subscribers#4023
Merged
akarnokd merged 1 commit intoReactiveX:1.xfrom Jun 22, 2016
Merged
1.x: fix timed replay() replaying old data for late subscribers#4023akarnokd merged 1 commit intoReactiveX:1.xfrom
akarnokd merged 1 commit intoReactiveX:1.xfrom
Conversation
This was referenced Jun 17, 2016
Closed
Member
|
👍 |
Member
Author
|
Definitely. @zsxwing Thoughts? |
Member
|
👍 Agreed that this is a bug fix instead of a broken change. |
Member
Author
|
Thanks @zsxwing ! |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
3 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
In the current master,
replayonly trucates its buffer if an event is received. This means if a subscriber subscribes between two events, the operator may replay old events. This PR skips those events. The operator is now consistent with the recently updatedReplaySubject.The old behavior was somewhat expected by a few unit tests that have been updated.
Related: #3917, #3918.