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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

*: add context for hook of getting/setting variables #38379

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Oct 18, 2022
Merged

*: add context for hook of getting/setting variables #38379

merged 1 commit into from
Oct 18, 2022

Conversation

YangKeao
Copy link
Member

Signed-off-by: YangKeao yangkeao@chunibyo.icu

What problem does this PR solve?

Issue Number: close #38378

Problem Summary:

The set/get hook of variables should be able to call asynchronous functions, which should be protected by a context.Context to be able to kill/timeout...

What is changed and how it works?

  1. Add ctx context.Context for SetGlobal/GetGlobal definition.
  2. Add this paramater to every function which calls the SetGlobal/GetGlobal, and do this step recursively...
  3. Some get/set with a specified variable name, which we know will not use the ctx, will be passed a context.Background() directly.
  4. Some context.TODO() in the middle way are modified to the correct context.

I have considered several different approches to not bring in such a big change:

  1. Distinguish the hook with / without the context. However, the setter/getter will always need a context (or implicitly pass a context.Background(). It will not solve any problem, but leave some context.Background() in some hidden paths.
  2. Use a new function to call without context. For example, have two functions: SetGlobalFromHook and SetGlobalFromHookWithoutContext, and implement the second with SetGlobalFromHook(context.Background(), ...). But I realized that SetGlobalFromHookWithoutContext( has no difference with SetGlobalFromHook(context.Background(), then I prefer to use the argument directly.

If you have better idea to pass in the context, without so many changes, please leave comments 😃 . Or you think it's not necessary, and use a newly created context with deadline is good enough, please also tells your opinion under this PR.

@YangKeao YangKeao requested a review from a team as a code owner October 10, 2022 11:59
@ti-chi-bot
Copy link
Member

ti-chi-bot commented Oct 10, 2022 •
edited
Loading

[REVIEW NOTIFICATION]

This pull request has been approved by:

  • bb7133
  • lcwangchao

To complete the pull request process, please ask the reviewers in the list to review by filling /cc @reviewer in the comment.
After your PR has acquired the required number of LGTMs, you can assign this pull request to the committer in the list by filling /assign @committer in the comment to help you merge this pull request.

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

Reviewer can indicate their review by submitting an approval review.
Reviewer can cancel approval by submitting a request changes review.

@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot added do-not-merge/release-note-label-needed Indicates that a PR should not merge because it's missing one of the release note labels. size/XXL Denotes a PR that changes 1000+ lines, ignoring generated files. labels Oct 10, 2022
@YangKeao YangKeao added the release-note-none Denotes a PR that doesn't merit a release note. label Oct 10, 2022
@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot removed the do-not-merge/release-note-label-needed Indicates that a PR should not merge because it's missing one of the release note labels. label Oct 10, 2022
@YangKeao
Copy link
Member Author

Most of this refractor is generated by Goland. Thanks Goland 😢 ❤️

@YangKeao YangKeao force-pushed the add-context-for-variable branch 3 times, most recently from 56ddc51 to 0e52f50 Compare October 11, 2022 07:08
@YangKeao
Copy link
Member Author

/tests

@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot added the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Oct 16, 2022
@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot added the status/LGT1 Indicates that a PR has LGTM 1. label Oct 17, 2022
@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot removed the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Oct 17, 2022
bb7133
bb7133 approved these changes Oct 17, 2022
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@bb7133 bb7133 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM

@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot added status/LGT2 Indicates that a PR has LGTM 2. and removed status/LGT1 Indicates that a PR has LGTM 1. labels Oct 17, 2022
@bb7133
Copy link
Member

bb7133 commented Oct 17, 2022

please also tells your opinion under this PR

I don't have any better idea - -

@YangKeao
Copy link
Member Author

/test

@YangKeao
add context for variable
2c432ea 
Signed-off-by: YangKeao <yangkeao@chunibyo.icu>
@YangKeao
Copy link
Member Author

/test

@YangKeao
Copy link
Member Author

/run-all-tests

@YangKeao
Copy link
Member Author

@lcwangchao @bb7133 Could you help me to merge this PR? It will block other PR from getting merged, (as I've modified the source code of enterprise-plugin)

@lcwangchao
Copy link
Collaborator

/merge

@ti-chi-bot
Copy link
Member

This pull request has been accepted and is ready to merge.

Commit hash: 2c432ea

@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot added the status/can-merge Indicates a PR has been approved by a committer. label Oct 18, 2022
@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot merged commit dd65832 into pingcap:master Oct 18, 2022
@sre-bot
Copy link
Contributor

sre-bot commented Oct 18, 2022

TiDB MergeCI notify

✅ Well Done! New fixed [1] after this pr merged.

CI Name Result Duration Compare with Parent commit
idc-jenkins-ci-tidb/integration-common-test 🔴 failed 2, success 15, total 17 17 min Existing failure
idc-jenkins-ci-tidb/common-test ✅ all 11 tests passed 9 min 12 sec Fixed
idc-jenkins-ci-tidb/integration-ddl-test 🟢 all 6 tests passed 29 min Existing passed
idc-jenkins-ci/integration-cdc-test 🟢 all 38 tests passed 23 min Existing passed
idc-jenkins-ci-tidb/tics-test 🟢 all 1 tests passed 6 min 44 sec Existing passed
idc-jenkins-ci-tidb/sqllogic-test-2 🟢 all 28 tests passed 6 min 24 sec Existing passed
idc-jenkins-ci-tidb/sqllogic-test-1 🟢 all 26 tests passed 4 min 13 sec Existing passed
idc-jenkins-ci-tidb/integration-compatibility-test 🟢 all 1 tests passed 3 min 12 sec Existing passed
idc-jenkins-ci-tidb/mybatis-test 🟢 all 1 tests passed 2 min 51 sec Existing passed
idc-jenkins-ci-tidb/plugin-test 🟢 build success, plugin test success 4min Existing passed

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@bb7133 bb7133 bb7133 approved these changes

@lcwangchao lcwangchao lcwangchao approved these changes

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
release-note-none Denotes a PR that doesn't merit a release note. size/XXL Denotes a PR that changes 1000+ lines, ignoring generated files. status/can-merge Indicates a PR has been approved by a committer. status/LGT2 Indicates that a PR has LGTM 2.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Add context (context.Context) for global variable get/set
5 participants
@YangKeao @ti-chi-bot @bb7133 @lcwangchao @sre-bot