You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
To keep the tenant data isolated from each other, We are using a prefix for Redis keys i.e A key which would be saved as card123 without multitenancy would be saved as public:card123 with Multitenancy.
If the user makes a payment on the older pod where MultiTenancy is disabled and client_secret is saved without a prefix, Now if the confirm calls goes to the pod where Multitenancy is enabled the Payment would fail with Unauthorized. This is just one of the instances where the payments would fail.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
To keep the tenant data isolated from each other, We are using a prefix for Redis keys i.e A key which would be saved as card123 without multitenancy would be saved as public:card123 with Multitenancy.
If the user makes a payment on the older pod where MultiTenancy is disabled and client_secret is saved without a prefix, Now if the confirm calls goes to the pod where Multitenancy is enabled the Payment would fail with Unauthorized. This is just one of the instances where the payments would fail.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: