docs(batch): explain record type discrepancy in failure and success handler#2868
Conversation
|
Thanks a lot for your first contribution! Please check out our contributing guidelines and don't hesitate to ask whatever you need. |
heitorlessa
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Awesome recommendations 🚀 Loved the attention to detail in improving the code example and its name.
Requested minor changes and we can merge right afterwards.
|
@heitorlessa, thanks. Changes addressed. I also removed the reference to [Accessing processed messages] since every needed explanation is now in the warning. |
heitorlessa
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
last brush up after I visualized locally; I'm accepting them and merging before I head for the weekend ;)
Signed-off-by: Heitor Lessa <lessa@amazon.nl>
|
Kudos, SonarCloud Quality Gate passed!
|
|
Awesome work, congrats on your first merged pull request and thank you for helping improve everyone's experience! |
|
Great, thanks @heitorlessa. Enjoy the weekend |









Issue number: #2816
Summary
This PR adds details to the
Batch Processor / Extending BatchProcessorsection of the docs.Changes
recordpassed arg tosuccess_handlerandfailure_handlersuccess_handleroverride caseUser experience
Checklist
If your change doesn't seem to apply, please leave them unchecked.
Is this a breaking change? No
RFC issue number:
Checklist:
Acknowledgment
By submitting this pull request, I confirm that you can use, modify, copy, and redistribute this contribution, under the terms of your choice.
Disclaimer: We value your time and bandwidth. As such, any pull requests created on non-triaged issues might not be successful.