This will explode violently if we have a non-ascii command name. That
shouldn't ever happen in core, and seems unlikely even in third-party
code. Regardless, it'll explode violently, so we can revisit things in
the future if we need to change the encoding here.
Differential Revision: https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D1092
Previously reviewed as D964, but required some fixups and therefore
seems to need a new revision.
Differential Revision: https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D1065
The wirepeer class provides concrete implementations of peer interface
methods for calling wire protocol commands. It makes sense for this
class to inherit from the peer abstract base class. So we change
that.
Since httppeer and sshpeer have already been converted to the new
interface, peerrepository is no longer adding any value. So it has
been removed. httppeer and sshpeer have been updated to reflect the
loss of peerrepository and the inheritance of the abstract base
class in wirepeer.
The code changes in wirepeer are reordering of methods to group
by interface.
Some Python code in tests was updated to reflect changed APIs.
.. api::
peer.peerrepository has been removed. Use repository.peer abstract
base class to represent a peer repository.
Differential Revision: https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D338
The last use of this API was removed in 3bcb9f9a4a63 in 2016. While
not formally deprecated, as of the last commit the code is no longer
explicitly tested. I think the new API has existed long enough for
people to transition to it.
I also have plans to more formalize the peer API and removing batch()
makes that work easier.
I'm not convinced the current client-side API around batching is
great. But it's the best we have at the moment.
.. api:: remove peer.batch()
Replace with peer.iterbatch().
Differential Revision: https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D320
The remote batching code is difficult to read. Let's improve it.
As part of the refactor, the future returned by method calls on
batchiter() instances is now populated. However, you still need to
consume the results() generator for the future to be set. But at
least now we can stuff the future somewhere and not have to worry
about aligning method call order with result order since you can
use a future to hold the result.
Also as part of the change, we now verify that @batchable generators
yield exactly 2 values. In other words, we enforce their API.
The non-iter batcher has been unused since 3bcb9f9a4a63. And to my
surprise we had no explicit unit test coverage of it! test-batching.py
has been overhauled to use the iterating batcher.
Since the iterating batcher doesn't allow non-batchable method
calls nor local calls, tests have been updated to reflect reality.
The iterating batcher has been used for multiple releases apparently
without major issue. So this shouldn't cause alarm.
.. api::
@peer.batchable functions must now yield exactly 2 values
Differential Revision: https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D319
@peer.batchable decorated generator functions have two forms:
yield value, None
and
yield args, future
yield value
These forms have been present since the decorator was introduced.
There are currently no in-repo consumers of the first form. So this
commit removes support for it.
Note that remoteiterbatcher.submit() asserts the 2nd form. And
3bcb9f9a4a63 removed the last user of remotebatcher, forcing everyone
to remoteiterbatcher. So anything relying on this in the wild would
have been broken since 3bcb9f9a4a63.
.. api::
@peer.batchable can no longer emit local values
Differential Revision: https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D318
This is very much like ordinary batch(), but it will let me add a mode
for batch where we have pathologically large requests which are then
handled streamily. This will be a significant improvement for things
like remotefilelog, which may want to request thousands of entities at
once.
"Real" batching only makes sense for wirepeers, but it greatly
simplifies the clients of peer instances if they can be ignorant to
actual batching capabilities of that peer. By moving the
not-really-batched batching code into peer.peer, all peer instances
now work with the batching API, thus simplifying users.
This leaves a couple of name forwards in wirepeer.py. Originally I had
planned to clean those up, but it kind of unclarifies other bits of
code that want to use batching, so I think it makes sense for the
names to stay exposed by wireproto. Specifically, almost nothing is
currently aware of peer (see largefiles.proto for an example), so
making them be aware of the peer module *and* the wireproto module
seems like some abstraction leakage. I *think* the right long-term fix
would actually be to make wireproto an implementation detail that
clients wouldn't need to know about, but I don't really know what that
would entail at the moment.
As far as I'm aware, no clients of batching in third-party extensions
will need updating, which is nice icing.
This change separates peer implementations from the repository implementation.
localpeer currently is a simple pass-through to localrepository, except for
legacy calls, which have already been removed from localpeer. This ensures that
the local client code only uses the most modern peer API when talking to local
repos.
Peers have a .local() method which returns either None or the underlying
localrepository (or descendant thereof). Repos have a .peer() method to return
a freshly constructed localpeer. The latter is used by hg.peer(), and also to
allow folks to pass either a peer or a repo to some generic helper methods.
We might want to get rid of .peer() eventually.
The only user of locallegacypeer is debugdiscovery, which uses it to pose as a
pre-setdiscovery client. But we decided to leave the old API defined in
locallegacypeer for clarity and maybe for other uses in the future.
It might be nice to actually define the peer API directly in peer.py as stub
methods. One problem there is, however, that localpeer implements
lock/addchangegroup, whereas the true remote peers implement unbundle.
It might be desireable to get rid of this distinction eventually.
