Skip to content
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

ref: Use moka for Cacher implementation, 2nd try #1010

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Feb 8, 2023
Merged

Conversation

Swatinem
Copy link
Member

@Swatinem Swatinem commented Feb 2, 2023

Reopens #979:

Replaces the current request coalescing solution with moka. This simplifies the channel creation and deduplication logic, as moka does that already. This also gives us in-memory caches right now, even though they are not hooked up to configuration yet.

Just opening this for now that its not lost

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Feb 2, 2023

Codecov Report

Merging #1010 (dd1ff94) into master (9f0f690) will decrease coverage by 0.03%.
The diff coverage is 94.78%.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #1010      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   74.14%   74.12%   -0.03%     
==========================================
  Files          81       81              
  Lines       11399    11384      -15     
==========================================
- Hits         8452     8438      -14     
+ Misses       2947     2946       -1     

Swatinem added a commit that referenced this pull request Feb 2, 2023
We can extract this from #1010, and this should help with moka-rs/moka#212 even if we do not (yet) switch to more widespread moka usage.
Replaces the current request coalescing solution with `moka`.
This simplifies the channel creation and deduplication logic, as `moka`
does that already. This also gives us in-memory caches right now, even
though they are not hooked up to configuration yet.
@Swatinem Swatinem marked this pull request as ready for review February 7, 2023 15:44
@Swatinem Swatinem requested a review from a team February 7, 2023 15:44
@Swatinem
Copy link
Member Author

Swatinem commented Feb 7, 2023

Seems to be stable so far, lets try to roll this out tomorrow.

@Swatinem Swatinem merged commit 1b9d219 into master Feb 8, 2023
@Swatinem Swatinem deleted the feat/remoka branch February 8, 2023 09:07
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

2 participants