-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 5
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
Clean up multiservice-discovery to be more robust, lock shared struct… #131
Conversation
…ures, and separate concerns. In particular, the use of parallel lists for thread end signaling channels and actual threads has been eliminated. Preliminary work to ensure other modifications are possible.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Nice! I like the distinction between running and non-running definitions. The only thing I am not a fan of are the comments. While they do help sometimes I feel like a lot of comments don't allow me to really understand the code but actually push me towards thinking that is what the code does without reviewing it. I am okay with some comments before the function which explains what the function on high level does but if we need comments in the flow I think we are just having bad names. If we added these comments above the functions we could add some sort of exporter which would generate docs for us and include it in our github pages in the future.
rs/ic-observability/multiservice-discovery/src/server_handlers/delete_definition_handler.rs
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
...bility/multiservice-discovery/src/server_handlers/add_boundary_node_to_definition_handler.rs
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
f1c9b06
to
d60c77c
Compare
24ffb42
to
5c4126d
Compare
I can't fix the broken test. The test data is in protobuf format, and I can't tell what the structure is, so I can't tell what the output is supposed to look like. EDIT: looks like the test is fixed, although it wasn't a good test before -- it used opaque data. We should avoid that. EDIT: the test is still broken, and left a process running in the background.
|
Can we delete this test and make a proper unit test instead? |
I believe this was supposed to be an integration test not a unit test. cc @pietrodimarco-dfinity |
…ures, and separate concerns.
In particular, the use of parallel lists for thread end signaling channels and actual threads has been eliminated.
Additional changes:
Preliminary work to ensure other modifications are possible.