From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by turing.freelists.org (Avenir Technologies Mail Multiplex) with ESMTP id 799F725C99 for ; Thu, 7 Jun 2018 13:02:36 -0400 (EDT) Received: from turing.freelists.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (turing.freelists.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ge6dvk5ccRK1 for ; Thu, 7 Jun 2018 13:02:36 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtp34.i.mail.ru (smtp34.i.mail.ru [94.100.177.94]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by turing.freelists.org (Avenir Technologies Mail Multiplex) with ESMTPS id 34B0425C98 for ; Thu, 7 Jun 2018 13:02:36 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [tarantool-patches] Re: [PATCH v3 4/4] netbox: introduce iterable future objects References: <9044b6d5e206cf3f9da67a1a8f32c070b8db55c4.1527886471.git.v.shpilevoy@tarantool.org> <20180607125638.GB30262@chai> From: Vladislav Shpilevoy Message-ID: <9354d48e-78b5-9906-6f0c-057ce69b2389@tarantool.org> Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2018 20:02:33 +0300 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20180607125638.GB30262@chai> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: tarantool-patches-bounce@freelists.org Errors-to: tarantool-patches-bounce@freelists.org Reply-To: tarantool-patches@freelists.org List-help: List-unsubscribe: List-software: Ecartis version 1.0.0 List-Id: tarantool-patches List-subscribe: List-owner: List-post: List-archive: To: tarantool-patches@freelists.org, Konstantin Osipov On 07/06/2018 15:56, Konstantin Osipov wrote: > * Vladislav Shpilevoy [18/06/02 02:09]: >> Netbox has two major ways to execute a request: sync and async. >> During execution of any a server can send multiplie responses via >> IPROTO_CHUNK. And the execution ways differ in how to handle the >> chunks (called messages or pushes). > > Please don't use asserts. They are hell to debug. Please use > tap suite if you need to check things, or simple output the result > you expect. I have removed assertions and use output checking. > > The patch itself looks good to me. Did you send a message to > docbot about the new API? > Yes, I have already created docbot request. But I do not agree with the API, when push by default is taken from session.sync. If you want make the sync be optional, we must either * make it mandatory, fix box.session.sync()/introduce fiber_sync()/something else, then allow to omit sync; Or * fix sync and then commit box.session.push with optional sync. Or with no sync, and allow it when somebody asks.