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
schema export via reactive driver #112
Conversation
@Override | ||
public void accept(String command) { | ||
try { | ||
connection.preparedQuery(command).toCompletableFuture().join(); |
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.
@vietj @FroMage @Sanne @DavideD WDYT of this?
I want to run Schema Export against the Vert.x driver, but I don't need it to actually be reactive. Also, I don't want to rewrite all of Hibernate's schema export stuff to use CompletionStage
or whatever.
This seems to work fine, except with the @RunWith(VertxUnitRunner.class)
where sometimes I get a harmless stacktrace from Vert.x at the end of my test.
Is this for some reason a terrible thing to be doing? Is there some other way we should be doing it?
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.
@gavinking What's the stack trace complaining about? Is it the Vertx blocked thread checker? If that's the case, I think we can safely ignore that because we are intending to be blocking here. To silence the blocked thread checker, we could use our own Vertx
instance where we can set the blocked thread checker interval to a really high value like so:
VertxOptions vertxOptions = new VertxOptions();
vertxOptions.setBlockedThreadCheckInterval(600);
vertxOptions.setBlockedThreadCheckIntervalUnit(TimeUnit.MINUTES);
Vertx vertx = Vertx.vertx(vertxOptions);
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.
Yeah it looks to me like Vert.x shuts down the thread because it thinks it's misbehaving.
Let's try your suggestion. Thanks.
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.
@aguibert I think you were searching for this work. Note that you might be better off with this branch, since it fixes some bugs exposed by this PR. |
@gavinking thanks for the pointer. I see that branch requires a snapshot of hibernate core. Should I be building a certain branch from core? Or better yet, is the required snapshot hosted on bintray or similar? |
sorry, we no longer deploy nightly snapshots. Project:
To deploy a snapshot to maven local:
|
|
That's actually super-slow. I prefer:
(Though you probably also need |
N.B. "master" will most likely work as well, but master is now version
5.5.x - Quarkus uses 5.4.x (as we don't have a stable release of 5.5.x
yet) so I'm backporting anything that Reactive needs to 5.4 too.
It's also a strategy to keep possibly invasive patches that other might
merge into master out of your way ;)
…On Fri, 15 May 2020 at 21:37, Gavin King ***@***.***> wrote:
I see that branch requires a snapshot of hibernate core. Should I be
building a certain branch from core?
master
—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#112 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAAKMTNM43573MOIKSS7HALRRWRZNANCNFSM4NAA6FLA>
.
|
Now part of #118. |
This patch depends on a proposed change to Hibernate core. Please do not merge.
For #104