feat(bindings/python): add check in py#5973
Conversation
5a78c41 to
eb1ae0f
Compare
6915dd0 to
7173e00
Compare
@pytest.mark.need_capability("list")
def test_sync_copy(service_name, operator, async_operator):
> operator.check()
E pyo3_runtime.PanicException: this functionality requires a Tokio contextonly this failed. |
interesting will take a look and try to learn it today |
|
reproduce in local bt |
|
you can change to this and test and we may create an issue about this |
7239eec to
02e3c18
Compare
|
now only Docs / build-website (pull_request) failed. All tests are passed. |
bindings/python/src/operator.rs
Outdated
| let runtime = pyo3_async_runtimes::tokio::get_runtime(); | ||
| let _guard = runtime.enter(); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
this is a temp solution maybe we can find a better solution
since we have this in build operator side
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It's wired that only this function need workaround. If check failed, the list should also fail too. I'm guessing all services related to sqlx will fail as well.
We should identify the root cause and fix it in the core instead. Having such a workaround in the bindings doesn't seem ideal to me.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It's wired that only this function need workaround. If
checkfailed, thelistshould also fail too. I'm guessing all services related to sqlx will fail as well.We should identify the root cause and fix it in the core instead. Having such a workaround in the bindings doesn't seem ideal to me.
yes agree and will try to help these days
There was a problem hiding this comment.
add a bit test, seems that list doesn't fail
There was a problem hiding this comment.
services related to sqlx will fail as well.
seems yes postgres and mysql are skipped
|
others LGTM, will try to find why the doc failed |
Xuanwo
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
-1 to put workaround in bindings.
|
did not reproduce why the doc failed... |
the reason why the error raise is, services depended on after going through the implement of P.S. it might crash on those services which depended on |
|
I believe this issue is complex enough that we need a separate one for it. |
|
let's merge main to see the error still exists? |
Xuanwo
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thank you @asukaminato0721 for working on this!
Which issue does this PR close?
part of #5963.
sub issue
Rationale for this change
What changes are included in this PR?
user can use blocking check and unblocking check in py binding
Are there any user-facing changes?