(fix) Fix issues with single-spa caused by naming extensions #720
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
Size Change: -210 kB (-8%) ✅ Total Size: 2.26 MB
ℹ️ View Unchanged
|
ibacher
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 6, 2023
|
Might ticket the parcel re-rendering in https://issues.openmrs.org/browse/O3-769 @ibacher . Also I am reminded of https://issues.openmrs.org/browse/O3-1418, which we may want to resurrect if we think excess parcels cause performance problems. I suspect we are better off focusing on the loaders à la core v5. |
|
@brandones Yeah, definitely should ticket it. I'm not too concerned about it performance-wise, but I'm a little worried that there's a gap between the mental model of an extension and the actual implementation, since it's easy to think about "extension x in slot y (with hash z)" as a single, unique identity for the extension, but, in fact, the actual instance that extension creates can be different, depending on the application state. Basically, it would seem cleaner if e.g., As a practical matter, though, this doesn't seem to really be affecting anything, so I'm not sure it's the highest priority. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Requirements
For changes to apps
If applicable
Summary
#708 accidentally broke our use of single-spa. Specifically, single-spa uses parcel names in order to track the parcel internally. However, we support rendering each extension basically any number of times. With the new names, this meant that if the same extension was loaded more than once (which happens relatively frequently, likely due to re-renders), this caused single-spa to improperly track the parcel's state resulting in a number of single-spa errors.
This shifts us to using the convention:
${slotName}/${extensionName}-${uniqueNumber}, which avoids these errors.As future work, we should look into better memoisation of rendered extensions and extension-slots to reduce the number of parcels we are generating.
Screenshots
Related Issue
Other