-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 39
feat: added ConfigChanged webhook event for config mutation notifications #877
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
Open
sauraww
wants to merge
1
commit into
main
Choose a base branch
from
feat/config-change-webhook-event
base: main
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
+346
−284
Open
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
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
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
Oops, something went wrong.
Oops, something went wrong.
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
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.
superposition/crates/context_aware_config/src/api/context/handlers.rs
Lines 131 to 139 in 381648f
Can you add the trigger for the webhook in
add_config_version?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.
No , add_config_version is synchronous and the trigger is async , we cannot call async function inside transaction.
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.
But you can return future which can be awaited on outside the synchronous block of the transaction
Anyways, on failure of webhook we dont even need to revert the queries so response awaiting outside transaction is safe as well
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.
There is a slight problem with this approach - I would be using execute_webhook_call which needs &mut DBConnection, but the transaction still holds the mutable borrow when we create the future. The future can't capture db_conn — the borrow checker won't allow it.
You can't return a future that captures &mut DBConnection from inside a transaction because the connection's lifetime is scoped to the transaction closure.
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.
Explanation:
Modified add_config_version:
Sample Usage:
You will get an error saying :
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.
The problem is that the future borrows transaction_conn, which only lives for the duration of the transaction closure — but we're trying to return the future out of the closure and .await it after the transaction completes.
We can't borrow transaction_conn in a future that outlives the transaction.
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.
Why do you need db conn with async stuff ?
The only async part is API call, which does not even require db conn