fix(batch): replace asyncio.get_event_loop() with future-compatible implementation for Python 3.12+ #7440
Conversation
…mplementation for Python 3.12+
pull-request-size
bot
added
the
size/S
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Pull Request Overview
This PR addresses deprecated asyncio API usage in the AsyncBatchProcessor to ensure compatibility with Python 3.12+ where asyncio.get_event_loop() will raise RuntimeError when no event loop is running. The fix replaces the deprecated call with future-compatible logic using asyncio.get_running_loop() and asyncio.new_event_loop().
- Replace deprecated
asyncio.get_event_loop()with try/except pattern using modern asyncio APIs - Add comprehensive comments explaining Python version compatibility strategy
- Maintain backward compatibility while preparing for Python 3.14+ requirements
Tip: Customize your code reviews with copilot-instructions.md. Create the file or learn how to get started.
| try: | ||
| loop = asyncio.get_running_loop() | ||
| except RuntimeError: | ||
| # No running loop, create a new one for Lambda environment | ||
| loop = asyncio.new_event_loop() | ||
| asyncio.set_event_loop(loop) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The logic is incorrect. asyncio.get_running_loop() is used to get an already running event loop, but in a Lambda environment without an active loop, you should directly create a new one. The correct approach is to use asyncio.get_event_loop() replacement pattern with asyncio.new_event_loop() and asyncio.set_event_loop() or use asyncio.run() for the coroutine execution.
Copilot uses AI. Check for mistakes.
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Hey @kattakaha! I left a small comment that probably we need to think a little bit more about this. I'm testing Python 3.14 to see if this is a problem.
| try: | ||
| loop = asyncio.get_running_loop() | ||
| except RuntimeError: | ||
| # No running loop, create a new one for Lambda environment | ||
| loop = asyncio.new_event_loop() | ||
| asyncio.set_event_loop(loop) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think this code block is basically doing nothing with this try/except: trying to get a loop running or create a new one, but since Lambda doesn't have an active loop, it mostly falls into the "except" block, right? I haven't tested it yet, but I'm not sure if this is the correct implementation for it.
Codecov Report❌ Patch coverage is
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## develop #7440 +/- ##
===========================================
- Coverage 96.37% 96.34% -0.03%
===========================================
Files 275 275
Lines 13048 13052 +4
Branches 974 974
===========================================
Hits 12575 12575
- Misses 366 370 +4
Partials 107 107 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. 🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
Issue number: closes #7397
Summary
This PR addresses the tech debt noted in
AsyncBatchProcessorregardingasyncio.get_event_loop()potentially failing in Python 3.12+. The fix replaces the deprecatedasyncio.get_event_loop()call with a future-compatible implementation that works across Python versions.Changes made
asyncio.get_event_loop()with try/except logic usingasyncio.get_running_loop()andasyncio.new_event_loop()asyncio.get_event_loop()raisesRuntimeErrorUser experience
RuntimeErrorin Python 3.14+ Lambda environmentsBy submitting this pull request, I confirm that you can use, modify, copy, and redistribute this contribution, under the terms of your choice.
Disclaimer: We value your time and bandwidth. As such, any pull requests created on non-triaged issues might not be successful.