mdn
Add support for message fragmentation to handle large messages
Description
Implemented message fragmentation to support the transmission of large messages by splitting them into smaller chunks. This enhancement ensures compatibility with systems that have strict size limits on individual messages, improving the overall reliability of the messaging system.
Motivation
The primary motivation behind these changes is to address the limitation where messages exceeding a predefined size limit could not be transmitted due to size restrictions on the receiving end. By introducing message fragmentation, we enable the successful transmission of all messages, regardless of their size, thereby enhancing the robustness and flexibility of our messaging system.
Additional details
This implementation is based on the understanding that many applications and services impose strict size constraints on incoming messages. By allowing messages to be split into smaller chunks and then reassembled on the receiving end, we ensure broader compatibility and improved performance in scenarios involving large data transfers.
Related issues and pull requests
Fixes #34151
Preview URLs
(comment last updated: 2024-07-13 12:12:20)
![github-actions[bot] avatar](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/15368?v=4 "Published by a pub.dev verified publisher"){kind=small}
it looks like @jpmedley is not active from a long time @Josh-Cena can you please look into this PR and my other PRs where he is assigned as a reviewer ?
This is very related to https://github.com/mdn/content/pull/29104 where @rebloor seems to hit a similar error as https://github.com/mdn/content/issues/34151. I'm going to add them as a reviewer.
This is very related to #29104 where @rebloor seems to hit a similar error as #34151. I'm going to add them as a reviewer.
Thanks
@Ashish-CodeJourney added @dotproto to review the code. Otherwise, I'll need to spin up some code and test.
@Ashish-CodeJourney added @dotproto to review the code. Otherwise, I'll need to spin up some code and test.
Okay, let's wait for his review
@Ashish-CodeJourney added @dotproto to review the code. Otherwise, I'll need to spin up some code and test.
Okay, let's wait for his review
@
@Ashish-CodeJourney added @dotproto to review the code. Otherwise, I'll need to spin up some code and test.
Okay, let's wait for his review
@rebloor @dotproto any updates ?
I'm trying to clear out my PR backlog today. I just gave this PR a read through and my current thinking is that if we do add chunking to the examples, we should probably do so to both the Python 3 and Node.js code at roughly the same time. I'm tentatively thinking about merging this and another similar PR for Node into a temp branch, cleaning up the text a little, and then landing that temp branch in main.
I'm trying to clear out my PR backlog today. I just gave this PR a read through and my current thinking is that if we do add chunking to the examples, we should probably do so to both the Python 3 and Node.js code at roughly the same time. I'm tentatively thinking about merging this and another similar PR for Node into a temp branch, cleaning up the text a little, and then landing that temp branch in main.
Makes sense. let me know if you need me to update anything in this
I'm trying to clear out my PR backlog today. I just gave this PR a read through and my current thinking is that if we do add chunking to the examples, we should probably do so to both the Python 3 and Node.js code at roughly the same time. I'm tentatively thinking about merging this and another similar PR for Node into a temp branch, cleaning up the text a little, and then landing that temp branch in main.
Makes sense. let me know if you need me to update anything in this
@rebloor @dotproto @Josh-Cena it's open since 4 - 5 months any updates ?