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

feat: implement sdk for session reduce #94

Merged
merged 26 commits into from
Mar 13, 2024
Merged

Conversation

KeranYang
Copy link
Member

@KeranYang KeranYang commented Jan 29, 2024

Tested using the existing golang sdk e2e: KeranYang/numaflow#98

Signed-off-by: Keran Yang <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Keran Yang <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Keran Yang <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Keran Yang <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Keran Yang <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Keran Yang <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Keran Yang <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Keran Yang <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Keran Yang <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Keran Yang <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Keran Yang <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Keran Yang <[email protected]>
@KeranYang KeranYang marked this pull request as ready for review January 29, 2024 01:15
@KeranYang KeranYang requested review from yhl25 and a team January 29, 2024 01:15
Signed-off-by: Keran Yang <[email protected]>
@whynowy whynowy marked this pull request as draft February 5, 2024 18:21
@whynowy
Copy link
Member

whynowy commented Feb 5, 2024

Convert to draft mode since it's taking too long to review.

Copy link
Contributor

@yhl25 yhl25 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

partial review

Signed-off-by: Keran Yang <[email protected]>
@KeranYang KeranYang requested a review from yhl25 March 12, 2024 14:03
@KeranYang KeranYang marked this pull request as ready for review March 12, 2024 14:03
@KeranYang KeranYang requested a review from a team March 12, 2024 14:03
Comment on lines 90 to 92
// set time out to 1 second as we expect a MERGE operation to finish quickly.
Timeout timeout = new Timeout(Duration.create(1, "seconds"));
try {
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Hacky, sometimes it might take more than 1 second

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

thanks, what should be the proper number? @yhl25

Copy link
Contributor

@yhl25 yhl25 Mar 12, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

let's wait until it returns

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

also, please add unit tests to cover merge followed by another operation to make sure the blocking call works!

Copy link
Member Author

@KeranYang KeranYang Mar 12, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

The method Await asks for a timeout, I don't think we should wait forever, right? Maybe we should set an atMost timeout value and throws when the operation takes too long.

Yes, the uts for merge are already in place. Please check the serverTest class.

Signed-off-by: Keran Yang <[email protected]>
@yhl25 yhl25 merged commit 68ffc5a into numaproj:main Mar 13, 2024
3 checks passed
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.

3 participants