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

Go client driver #465

Merged
merged 3 commits into from Mar 11, 2015
Merged

Go client driver #465

merged 3 commits into from Mar 11, 2015

Conversation

sougou
Copy link
Contributor

@sougou sougou commented Mar 11, 2015

This is the go client driver. The comments in client.go document how it should be used.

These row iterators conform to the database/sql/driver
interface requirements. Since these functions perform useful
data conversions, I've implemented these at this level
so that they can also be used by someone who does not want
to go through database/sql.
Rollback should not return an error if we're not in a
transaction. Many frameworks generally perform a rollback
for good measure. So, returning an error just causes confusion.
This was referenced Mar 11, 2015
@alainjobart
Copy link
Contributor

Your commit doesn't complain about missing comments on public methods? How do you do that? :)

LGTM in general, I'd have a few nitpicks here and there but nothing much.

@sougou
Copy link
Contributor Author

sougou commented Mar 11, 2015

The tools make an exception when they see my name :).
Well, it's because the type itself is unexported. This lets me avoid duplicating the comments from the interfaces.

@alainjobart
Copy link
Contributor

Ah I see now. That makes sense. I had seen it somewhere else and I was wondering. I'll use the non-exported type trick more often then. :)

)

// fakeVTGateService has the server side of this fake
type fakeVTGateService struct {
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

We already have a fakeVTGateService, what's the point to not reuse it ? https://github.com/youtube/vitess/blob/master/go/vt/vtgate/vtgateconntest/client.go
In the meanwhile, I'd like to bring up a question that maybe we could consolidate our fake structs so that people could easily reuse existing ones.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

We should talk about it. As I mentioned in the other issue, there are pros & cons.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

np

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The wrangler/testlib code is a good example of a library meant to be used by tests. I wasn't arguing against that, I just didn't want the fake to depend on bson RPC earlier. Ideally, fakes and test utility functions should be in their own libraries.

I would also caution against using too many layers in unit tests: if you're testing the client high level library, connecting through the low level library to the server, you can setup a fake server and connect to it, or you could use a fake client connector, and that would be simpler / easier, and make the unit test more 'unit'...

sougou added a commit that referenced this pull request Mar 11, 2015
@sougou sougou merged commit 6e4c2ea into master Mar 11, 2015
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

3 participants