remove log line

nits

In D4375#130579, @ashoat wrote:

Thanks @karol-bisztyga, my apologies... I simply wasn't paying enough attention.

Some nits inline – please address before landing!

update error message

In D4554#130404, @palys-swm wrote:

We want to handle a situation when we save the records in the database (it didn't work in the tests).

Could you explain it a little more? How would we want to handle it? What do you mean by that it didn't work in the test?

rebase

rebase

In D4375#129960, @ashoat wrote:

Correct me if I'm wrong but I think my question still hasn't been responded to?

empty

Looks ok, personally, I'd try to do this without pointers but it probably doesn't matter.

After I've removed it all completely and the base image is downloaded from the hub, now I have that warning badge about architecture.

add buildx note to the docs

Ok, I still think that the 3rd option is the best but since I'm outvoted, I'm going to go with option number 2. Option 1 seems like a quick fix and I don't think that in the end, it delivers an efficient solution.

Thx @geekbrother
My suspicion is still that you've built the base image locally.
could you remove the base image and rebuild the tunnelbroker image?
the best way of doing this would be to just clean up the docker completely and run tunnelbroker start
the goal is to see that the base image is being downloaded from the hub

use buildx

@geekbrother could you please share a screenshot of the "images" tab in the docker desktop app? I requested this here and also pinged you on the Comm app:

rebase + apply for unit tests

Please fix the typo in this diff's title:

[services] Tunnelbroker - Database function that removes messages in a batch using the composite key and batchWrite

Shouldn't we also modify the entity files? I'd put the fields in this file (especially in the constructor) in the correct order which would be:

retrigger CI/request review