Skip to content
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

Add kv::watch_many functions #1364

Open
wants to merge 5 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Add kv::watch_many functions #1364

wants to merge 5 commits into from

Conversation

Jarema
Copy link
Member

@Jarema Jarema commented Jan 20, 2025

Signed-off-by: Tomasz Pietrek [email protected]

Signed-off-by: Tomasz Pietrek <[email protected]>
@Jarema Jarema requested a review from caspervonb January 20, 2025 15:54
Signed-off-by: Tomasz Pietrek <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Tomasz Pietrek <[email protected]>
@@ -507,6 +507,41 @@ impl Store {
.await
}

/// Creates a [futures::Stream] over [Entries][Entry] a given key in the bucket, which yields
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Something seems to be missing here

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

fixed.

.stream
.create_consumer(super::consumer::push::OrderedConfig {
deliver_subject: self.stream.context.client.new_inbox(),
description: Some("kv watch consumer".to_string()),
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Is this some kid of convention used across the clients? Because if not, I don;t think it's good we have that description from one client but not from others.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Let's discuss this on the OSS call. I think we did, but we never made it into ADR.
However- this convention is used across the client, so it's consistent at least in the context of the PR.

Signed-off-by: Tomasz Pietrek <[email protected]>
@Jarema Jarema requested a review from piotrpio January 21, 2025 12:35
Copy link
Contributor

@piotrpio piotrpio left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants