WIP: replace connection pool #559
Draft
Conversation
This file contains hidden or 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 #559 +/- ## ========================================== - Coverage 85.27% 84.95% -0.33% ========================================== Files 124 123 -1 Lines 1596 1575 -21 Branches 34 35 +1 ========================================== - Hits 1361 1338 -23 - Misses 235 237 +2
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
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 Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
This replaces the built-in pool with pool-party, which is a lot simpler and has much better diagnostics. We need to hook in a default event listener that at least reports errors.
This also drops support for 2.12 because of annoying issues getting pool-party to compile, but I guess I should look into it a little bit more because it's going to annoy people.
After merging we need to tag an RC to let people test the new pool before a full upgrade, since it's a potentially big problem if it's buggier than the existing pool (I don't think it is but concurrency is hard).