-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 287
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
chore: Allow combining non base-derived objects for retries #485
Open
hasier
wants to merge
5
commits into
jd:main
Choose a base branch
from
hasier:issue-481
base: main
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
Open
Changes from 3 commits
Commits
Show all changes
5 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
7 changes: 7 additions & 0 deletions
7
releasenotes/notes/allow-retry-callables-ba921a2b57229540.yaml
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
@@ -0,0 +1,7 @@ | ||
--- | ||
features: | ||
- | | ||
Allow for callables to be combined as retry values. This will only | ||
work when used combined with their corresponding implementation | ||
retry objects, e.g. only async functions will work when used together | ||
with async retry strategies. |
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I see you added
is True
everywhere. This seems like a different change not required. Are we sure we need this?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
While adding the tests I noticed that, if a wrong combination of strategies is added (combination of async strategies in a sync context), then we'd end up trying to
and
/or
a coroutine, which hangs forever as it's never going to be resolved in the sync context. By adding theis True
we directly check if the result is exactly that and avoid endlessly waiting for the coroutine.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Actually, thinking about it a bit more... Maybe we'd rather let it hang? Not sure what's best they, without the changes it hangs forever, which is not very intuitive, and with these changes it finishes without failures but it does not run the strategy at all, giving an invalid outcome 😕
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Is it feasible to trap this invalid call pattern and raise an exception to make it obvious that there's a programming error?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I came up with this, it is more coupled to the actual implementations, but it now fails on invalid scenarios so it's more explicit. I used a similar check to the one already existing in
__init__.py
, let me know what you think @jd f8725d6