Issue 5676: Introduced the option to fall back to TCP when DNS resolv…

[cgm-aw]

See #5676

[vietj]

I think we are missing a test for this

[cgm-aw]

I thought about testing this, but all Vertx does here is pass the parameter to the Netty resolver. So I just tested this new functionality. Writing a test which checks whether the fallback actually works is out of scope here from my point of view, and I think it would require a lot of mocking and/or dependencies to Netty internals, which would make the test hard to maintain.
Let me know if you still want a test to test the actual fallback in Netty and I will give it a shot.

[vietj]

@cgm-aw can you sign the Eclipse Contributor Agreement

[cgm-aw]

Sure, you can find me under "cgmaw"

[vietj]

vertx has a mock dns resolver we can use

…

On Thu, Sep 4, 2025 at 8:45 AM Andreas ***@***.***> wrote: *cgm-aw* left a comment (eclipse-vertx/vert.x#5692) <#5692 (comment)> I thought about testing this, but all Vertx does here is pass the parameter to the Netty resolver. So I just tested this new functionality. Writing a test which checks whether the fallback actually works is out of scope here from my point of view, and I think it would require a lot of mocking and/or dependencies to Netty internals, which would make the test hard to maintain. Let me know if you still want a test to test the actual fallback in Netty and I will give it a shot. — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#5692 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AABXDCUPPRHQYG5MK5C6FYT3Q7N2DAVCNFSM6AAAAACFKQEJWGVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZTENJSGE3DGOJZGE> . You are receiving this because you commented.Message ID: ***@***.***>

[cgm-aw]

New PR for merge into master: #6116