-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 794
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
Return BoxStream
with 'static
lifetime from ObjectStore::list
#6619
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Return BoxStream
with 'static
lifetime from ObjectStore::list
#6619
Conversation
In developmentseed/obstore#35 I verified that this does enable streaming Screen.Recording.2024-10-23.at.12.25.19.PM.mov |
Looks like @tustvold had a conversation on #6587 so I defer to him. However, I had a quick look at the code and it looks pretty good to me. Thank you @kylebarron |
@@ -44,37 +44,38 @@ pub(crate) trait ListClientExt { | |||
prefix: Option<&Path>, | |||
delimiter: bool, | |||
offset: Option<&Path>, | |||
) -> BoxStream<'_, Result<ListResult>>; | |||
) -> BoxStream<'static, Result<ListResult>>; |
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.
what is the implications of this stream having static
lifetime? I don't understand the implications on downstream crates
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.
For my use case, Python bindings with pyo3 don't allow you to have any lifetime parameters shorter than 'static
: https://pyo3.rs/v0.22.5/class.html#no-lifetime-parameters
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.
Right -- I guess I am wondering does this effectively mean that the returned streams can't be borrowed (aka they effectively have to be Arc'd or something like that where the stream is owned 🤔 )
Basically I am trying to think about what usecases, if any, that this additional constrait would be break (I realize some people may need to update the type signatures, I am thinking of more fundamental changes)
One thing maybe we could do is try to update DataFusion (and our internal INfluxDB code) with this change and see what, if anything, breaks for us 🤔
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.
This would only effect implementers of the trait, its a stronger contract on what the implementation chooses to return. The result is consumers of object_store shouldn't notice much
This change makes sense to me, and is definitely something we should consider when looking to make a breaking releas. However, I think we want to get a few more such changes lined up before taking the plunge, object_store breaking changes are quite disruptive |
To preface: not expecting this to be merged imminently, as it may be a while before object-store's next breaking release, and I figure there may be a cleaner way to change this. But it was useful to learn a bit more about streams, and I'll probably use this patch in my Python-facing object-store bindings.
Which issue does this PR close?
Closes #6587.
Rationale for this change
Easier wrapping of
ObjectStore::list
in bindings, e.g. to Python, that don't allow lifetime references.What changes are included in this PR?
Change the return type of
ObjectStore::list
andObjectStore::list_with_offset
toAre there any user-facing changes?
Yes.