global: use priority monitors

[Maria-12648430]

OTP 28 introduced priority messages and prioritization of monitor messages. I think the global module is a good place to use them, in order to reduce (albeit not eliminate) the rejection of registrations when a registered process has just died but the resulting 'DOWN' message has not yet been processed by global.

[github-actions]

CT Test Results

    2 files     72 suites   1h 7m 1s ⏱️
1 685 tests 1 340 ✅ 344 💤 1 ❌
1 937 runs  1 534 ✅ 402 💤 1 ❌

For more details on these failures, see this check.

Results for commit 3c70521.

♻️ This comment has been updated with latest results.

To speed up review, make sure that you have read Contributing to Erlang/OTP and that all checks pass.

See the TESTING and DEVELOPMENT HowTo guides for details about how to run test locally.

Artifacts

• Complete CT logs (Download Logs)
• HTML Documentation (Download HTML Docs)
• No Windows Installer found

// Erlang/OTP Github Action Bot

[Maria-12648430]

As an afterthought... there is also the tag option for monitors. Couldn't we use that to also transport the registered name of the monitored process, so we could skip some lookups?

[Maria-12648430]

The test failure seems unrelated to this PR, it occurs in interactive_shell_SUITE, something regarding unicode.

[jhogberg]

Thanks for the PR! Have you considered how the changed message order could affect the rest of the code?

[Maria-12648430]

Thanks for the PR! Have you considered how the changed message order could affect the rest of the code?

Yes. Also, @juhlig reviewed it and found nothing amiss. However, message order is not all too easy to reason about, so yet another pair of eyes would be great.

FWIW, we draw some additional confidence out of the fact that even as of now, 'DOWN' messages may arrive at any moment, in any order. So if this PR changes anything in that regard at all, it is likely an amplification of the effects of an existing bug.

[jhogberg]

Yes. Also, @juhlig reviewed it and found nothing amiss. However, message order is not all too easy to reason about, so yet another pair of eyes would be great.

FWIW, we draw some additional confidence out of the fact that even as of now, 'DOWN' messages may arrive at any moment, in any order. So if this PR changes anything in that regard at all, it is likely an amplification of the effects of an existing bug.

I haven't found anything amiss either, and the tests (spartan as they are) haven't either in two weeks, so I'm looking at merging this later on this week. :-)