Fix handling of binary attr unprocessed #126
Merged
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
|
It would be nice if we didn't have to 'fix' binary attributes when returned as unprocessed items. |
| UNPROCESSED_KEYS: { | ||
| UserModel.Meta.table_name: batch_items | ||
| def test_batch_write_with_unprocessed(self): | ||
| items = [] |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Looks like you're re-assigning this on line 1816, delete section?
|
binary attributes are double encoded by default unfortunately see #127 it turns out that binary attributes written by the unprocessed items flow were n+2 times encoded, where n is the number of times the item was returned as an unprocessed item from subsequent retries. |
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
fixes #125
worth noting that #97 #114 #120 all got it wrong, at least i think #97 did, the approach is a little different
I read the spec and reimplemented correctly http://docs.aws.amazon.com/amazondynamodb/latest/APIReference/API_BatchWriteItem.html#API_BatchWriteItem_ResponseSyntax