-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 248
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
[tracking] support hyper/http/etc. 1.0 #977
Comments
It's definitely on our radar, and we played around with the release candidates before 1.0 was cut. Previous work was tracked in smithy-lang/smithy-rs#1925, but this issue is better for visibility. |
This is blocking use of the SDK with Axum 0.7 for streaming uploads to S3. Mentioned in #989 |
This is actually my exact use case. :) |
It looks like you can use the |
OK thanks will keep an eye on that. At this point given how disruptive this change is (why?), I'm waiting for things to settle a bit. :) |
We'll have a fix for the specific task of creating a body from an Http 1x body out soon: smithy-lang/smithy-rs#3300 |
@rcoh I've been picking away at the upgrade in a branch and tried to use this. Unless I'm missing something this doesn't work for the axum use case. For reasons I'm not sure about the axum body is not Sync (it's UnsyncBoxBody). The bounds on this method require a Sync body. Can the bounds be relaxed here to remove Sync? |
Hmm, possibly. I believe we could create an internal variant that wrapped the body in a Since the mutex would be uncontended, I don't expect it to have any performance implications. I've added another checklist item at the top. |
OK thanks. It's unfortunate a mutex would need to be added here but IMO it would be better to have this internal to the SDK. I suppose we could ask the axum people to add sync, but I doubt that would get much traction either, even though in practice I would imagine all of the bodies are actually sync. |
In the meantime, you could work around this by creating your own sync-body-wrapper that acquires a mutex when calling poll. |
@rcoh I went to take a crack at this and FWIW I don't think a trivial wrapper is possible. The Body trait has functions that are not async (is_end_stream and size_hint), so using an async mutex is not going to work for directly accessing the underlying body in these scenarios. So I suppose the option is to synthesize is_end_stream and size_hint in the context of poll_frame(), or just give up and have some type of intermediate stream that moves data from one body to the other. I will take a quick crack at the former and post the code if I get it working. |
Oh that makes sense. I think we can actually use a regular mutex possibly?
Since it isn't held across an await point? I'd need to dig in to understand
more.
…On Tue, Jan 16, 2024, 6:32 PM Matt Klein ***@***.***> wrote:
In the meantime, you could work around this by creating your own
sync-body-wrapper that acquires a mutex when calling poll.
@rcoh <https://github.com/rcoh> I went to take a crack at this and FWIW I
don't think a trivial wrapper is possible. The Body trait has functions
that are not async (is_end_stream and size_hint), so using an async mutex
is not going to work for directly accessing the underlying body in these
scenarios. So I suppose the option is to synthesize is_end_stream and
size_hint in the context of poll_frame(), or just give up and have some
type of intermediate stream that moves data from one body to the other. I
will take a quick crack at the former and post the code if I get it working.
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#977 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AADYKZ2LX36QLR73UGPYP4DYO4EYZAVCNFSM6AAAAAA76NWY5CVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMYTQOJUGY4DMMZZGY>
.
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID:
***@***.***>
|
I don't think a regular mutex is sound, because technically the mutex has to be held while calling poll_frame which is an await point. Mostly for fun I tried to implement this and it's actually fairly tricky. This is the best I could come up with without introducing unsafe code: https://gist.github.com/mattklein123/930df76886a7324e291abf0b2003549b. In particular we have to use Arc so we can get an OwnedMutexGuard as there is no way to prove that the guard lifetime is safe. This could be fixed with unsafe code. I have no experience writing manual futures so it's possible someone will come along and provide a simpler/faster solution. |
For anyone watching I updated https://gist.github.com/mattklein123/930df76886a7324e291abf0b2003549b to use unsafe and remove extra arc/box/allocations. I believe it is correct but will test it out more thoroughly. |
## Motivation and Context * #1925 * awslabs/aws-sdk-rust#977 ## Description Deprecate http-02x APIs from inlineable `PresignedRequest` API. These should have been feature gated originally but they weren't. For now we'll mark them deprecated and encourage people to move to the 1.x equivalents. ## Checklist <!--- If a checkbox below is not applicable, then please DELETE it rather than leaving it unchecked --> - [x ] For changes to the AWS SDK, generated SDK code, or SDK runtime crates, I have created a changelog entry Markdown file in the `.changelog` directory, specifying "aws-sdk-rust" in the `applies_to` key. ---- _By submitting this pull request, I confirm that you can use, modify, copy, and redistribute this contribution, under the terms of your choice._
## Motivation and Context * smithy-lang/smithy-rs#1925 * #977 ## Description Deprecate http-02x APIs from inlineable `PresignedRequest` API. These should have been feature gated originally but they weren't. For now we'll mark them deprecated and encourage people to move to the 1.x equivalents. ## Checklist <!--- If a checkbox below is not applicable, then please DELETE it rather than leaving it unchecked --> - [x ] For changes to the AWS SDK, generated SDK code, or SDK runtime crates, I have created a changelog entry Markdown file in the `.changelog` directory, specifying "aws-sdk-rust" in the `applies_to` key. ---- _By submitting this pull request, I confirm that you can use, modify, copy, and redistribute this contribution, under the terms of your choice._
## Motivation and Context <!--- Why is this change required? What problem does it solve? --> <!--- If it fixes an open issue, please link to the issue here --> * #3710 * #1925 * awslabs/aws-sdk-rust#977 ## Description This is the first of what I'm going to assume will be several PRs on the path to migrating us to hyper 1.x. The goal is to reach a desired state as far as crate organization, feature flags, and how this is all enabled by default (eventually). This first PR just moves existing HTTP client support around as prep work for what's to come. NOTE: This is all getting merged into a staging branch `hyper1` rather than `main` * Migrate `hyper-0.14` and `hyper-1.x` support into a new `aws-smithy-http-client` crate. * re-export `hyper 0.14` from `aws-smithy-runtime`. * Remove support from `aws-smithy-experimental` for hyper 1.x and leave breadcrumb for where it lives now. * Migrate `CaptureSmithyConnection` into `aws-smithy-runtime-api` so that it can be used by new crate without creating a circular dependency. Why a new crate? Several reasons: * The entire hyper and rustls ecosystem bifurcates on hyper 0.x. The resulting `Cargo.toml` is kind of a mess as a result. In a new crate we can isolate this ugliness as well as manage feature flags more meaningfully with this in mind. * Placing the HTTP client implementation in `aws-smithy-runtime` makes it a load bearing crate for all of the HTTP and TLS related feature flags we may wish to expose _in addition to it's own feature flags_. This sort of explodes with the aforementioned bifurcation. * I expect `aws-smithy-runtime` and generated SDKs to choose a default configuration but customers can pull in this new `aws-smithy-http-client` crate and enable different flags for specific use cases (e.g. FIPS). * A new crate may be a good place to explore new functionality (e.g. we've considered forking our own implementation of `hyper-util` legacy client, this gives us a natural place for that should we go down that route) ## Future Where are we going? * I want to relocate all of `aws-smithy-runtime/src/client/http/test_util` into the `aws-smithy-http-client` crate. These are utilities for testing with a mock/fake HTTP client and they make more sense in this new crate. This also allows us to update the utils to support the hyper/http 1.x ecosystem and feature gate the legacy ecosystem. We can re-export the legacy ecosystem test support from `aws-smithy-runtime` for now. * Update our internal usage of these test utils with the new 1.x ecosystem and deprecate the old APIs but leave them in place. * I expect we'll deprecate them with a plan to remove or at least feature gate differently in the future with a recommendation to upgrade. * I want to explore the tickets/use cases people have asked for to see what/if we can do anything better with the hyper 1.x API surface. In particular I think we may want to just expose our own builder type (new type around hyper-util builder). * Because `hyper-util` is not 1.x we can't expose the `HyperClientBuilder` like we did previously. I don't think we should even if it was 1.x though, we should offer a "default client" with knobs for all the things we do want to support directly. Anything not found there you have to bring your own client configured to your heart's content. * We need to explore if we can make `aws-lc` the default (at least on `unix`). * I want to add optional support for `s2n-tls` to `aws-smithy-http-client` and reconcile related crypto/tls feature flags with this in mind. * Need to figure out how we set the default for `aws-smithy-runtime` and generated clients to be hyper 1.x and add appropriate new flags, etc. * Update changelogs, versions, lockfiles, etc. ---- _By submitting this pull request, I confirm that you can use, modify, copy, and redistribute this contribution, under the terms of your choice._
Describe the feature
There may already be a tracking issue on this (I couldn't find it), but was hoping to understand the timeline of supporting the entire hyper 1.0 cascade throughout the ecosystem. For examples functions like: https://docs.rs/aws-smithy-types/latest/aws_smithy_types/body/struct.SdkBody.html#method.from_body_0_4 are sprinkled around and would need to hopefully support 1.0 variants.
Checklist
SdkBody
from http-body = 1.0 bodies (Add support for constructing sdk body types from http-body 1.0 smithy-lang/smithy-rs#3300)SdkBody
from http-body = 1.0 bodies that are!Sync
via an internal mutexSdkBody
implementshttp-body = 1.0
via a shim #1046SdkBody
natively implementshttp-body
1.0 with 0.4x behavior implemented as a shim.http-body
1.0 frames instead ofhttp-body
0.4.xhyper_ext_1_0
added utilizing Hyper 1.0QueryWriter
to either operate onhttp
= 1 orHttpRequest
shim smithy-lang/smithy-rs#3367A note for the community
Community Note
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: