Skip to content

Conversation

@davidpdrsn
Copy link
Member

Adds a sections to the Service docs that mentions the subtlety around cloning services and readiness.

Copy link
Member

@LucioFranco LucioFranco left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Yeah, good catch and we should add this. We may also want to add it to the possible lists of panic that if you clone and don't poll ready that instance then it could panic. We could also ensure that our tower-test mock service covers this, we already do this somewhat but I don't remember if it catches this specific case.

@davidpdrsn
Copy link
Member Author

We could also ensure that our tower-test mock service covers this, we already do this somewhat but I don't remember if it catches this specific case.

Thats a good idea. I'll look into that.

@davidpdrsn davidpdrsn merged commit 7b15288 into master May 6, 2021
@davidpdrsn davidpdrsn deleted the david/service-cloning-docs branch May 6, 2021 07:26
hawkw added a commit that referenced this pull request Jun 17, 2022
# Unreleased

- None

# 0.3.2 (June 17, 2022)

## Added

- **docs**: Clarify subtlety around cloning and readiness in the
  `Service` docs ([#548])
- **docs**: Clarify details around shared resource consumption in
  `poll_ready()` ([#662])

[#548]: #548
[#662]: #662
hawkw added a commit that referenced this pull request Jun 17, 2022
# 0.3.2 (June 17, 2022)

## Added

- **docs**: Clarify subtlety around cloning and readiness in the
  `Service` docs ([#548])
- **docs**: Clarify details around shared resource consumption in
  `poll_ready()` ([#662])

[#548]: #548
[#662]: #662
@lilyball
Copy link

lilyball commented Jul 1, 2022

The examples here don't seem to call self.inner.poll_ready(), so isn't it still broken?

@LucioFranco
Copy link
Member

Yeah, they should for sure be calling inner.poll_ready...

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.

4 participants