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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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
feat(storage/transfermanager): prototype #10045
feat(storage/transfermanager): prototype #10045
Changes from 3 commits
bee724f
189f87b
a23db2e
bbdd5a6
9fcaca4
6353ea3
ca52f14
1d00ad4
79d34f4
f5a6b33
8956b7b
ed19c7f
5afae53
5e42c62
623fdd3
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.
Presumably this should be send-only and output should be receive?
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.
We are sending and receiving from both channels in different places in the downloader. Unidirectional channels could be used in subcomponents or if we were providing the channel to the user, but I don't see how we could implement this with unidirectional channels - if we only received from output, who would send us the output (and vice-versa for work)?
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.
Presumably we could optimize this by spinning up workers as needed when there are objects enqueued? Doesn't have to be in this PR though.
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.
Sure, though I'm not sure how much that would optimize this by... I guess it depends on the num of workers.
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.
Yeah something we can test out 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.
We might need to look into whether we should be attempting to close the writer if possible -- seems annoying for end users to have to clean up. Though, I guess we don't guarantee that a close method exists.
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.
Do you mean the writer provided through in.Destination? The
io.WriterAt
interface and for that matterio. OffsetWriter
do not have a Close method, as you say. In any case, I feel like it'd be bad practice to close a writer we don't own?