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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
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
[WIP] Decoupling concurrency guarantees/behavior on existing invocation id in invocation request #2393
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
[WIP] Decoupling concurrency guarantees/behavior on existing invocation id in invocation request #2393
Changes from 3 commits
d6cfaa3
98b294b
1726011
8da96be
a3205d9
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
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.
If the previous one becomes Sequential, then this can be
Concurrent
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.
It's unclear what the default means here. It might be worth adding a couple of words to explain that it'll use the default behavior based on the target type (virtual object, service, etc.)
Also, see my note below.
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.
suggestion:
IfExists
might be a reasonable option if you like it. I can already imagine the call-site beinginvocation::IfExists::Attach
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'm not sure I like having the default variant. It adds cognitive overhead. It sounds like "it depends". An alternative strategy is to always set it on the caller-side, I suppose.
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.
it is "it depends" really :D
The reason i was thinking about introducing
UseTargetDefault
is for backward compatibility, and eventually i guess we remove it. The idea is that next release will act on this new two types and their variants, but we never write it, while the release afterward will also write those fields.Also i tried to make clear the "it depends" adding the method below "infer target default"
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.
does that need
serde(default)
?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.
this field is not new, i just moved it to the bottom here.
Check failure on line 371 in crates/types/src/invocation.rs