generated from ipfs/ipfs-repository-template
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 104
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: pass records limit on routing.FindProviders #299
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #299 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 48.15% 47.59% -0.57%
==========================================
Files 279 276 -3
Lines 33524 33467 -57
==========================================
- Hits 16145 15928 -217
- Misses 15690 15849 +159
- Partials 1689 1690 +1
|
hacdias
changed the title
feat: provide maximum count to routing.FindProviders
feat: indicate if response will be streamable on routing.FindProviders
May 12, 2023
13 tasks
hacdias
force-pushed
the
fix/nljson-routing
branch
from
May 15, 2023 10:13
cb202f7
to
c793b6d
Compare
hacdias
force-pushed
the
fix/nljson-routing
branch
2 times, most recently
from
May 15, 2023 10:33
f3bb207
to
d37890a
Compare
hacdias
force-pushed
the
providers-count
branch
2 times, most recently
from
May 15, 2023 10:54
6af6415
to
d96e912
Compare
hacdias
force-pushed
the
fix/nljson-routing
branch
from
May 16, 2023 11:26
d37890a
to
6829ed6
Compare
lidel
reviewed
May 23, 2023
hacdias
changed the title
feat: indicate if response will be streamable on routing.FindProviders
feat: pass limit on routing.FindProviders
May 24, 2023
hacdias
changed the title
feat: pass limit on routing.FindProviders
feat: pass records limit on routing.FindProviders
May 24, 2023
lidel
approved these changes
May 25, 2023
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.
Configurable limit of returned responses lgtm, makes it more useful as a library, thanks!
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
While working on ipfs/kubo#9877, I noticed that the
ContentRouter
interface required in order to implement the Routing V1 server does not provide enough information to make an education decision about how many providers to return.This did not use to be an issue because the API was non-streamed so we could hardcode a value on the implementation (or timeout). Now that the server also supports streaming requests, it would be great to be able to differentiate both.
After talking to @lidel, we talked about adding a
count int
parameter in theFindProviders
. By default,count
will be 20 for non-streamable requests and 0 (unbounded) for streaming requests.However, I find that that introduces unnecessary complexity here. So I just added aSee #299 (comment).stream bool
parameter toFindProviders
instead, and we let the implementer ofContentRouter
decide what to do with it.Note that existing tests that I updated test this too.