Dirkjan Bussink <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Eric, > > > On 12 Mar 2021, at 10:41, Eric Wong <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > I'm not in favor of new options since they add support costs > > and increase the learning/maintenance curve. > > > > What I've been thinking about is bumping the major version to 6.0 > > > > Although our internals are technically not supported stable API, > > there may be odd stuff out there similar to OobGC that uses > > instance_variable_get or similar things to reach into internals. > > Added with the fact our internals haven't changed in many years; > > I'm inclined to believe there are other OobGC-like things out > > there that can break. > > > > Also, with 6.0; users who completely avoid Threads can keep > > using 5.x, while others can use 6.x > > That sounds like a good plan then. Once there’s a new version we can > bump that on our side to remove the manual patch then.
OK. I think it's safe to wait a few days for more comments before releasing in case there's more last-minute revelations (see below :x) > > Btw, did you consider replacing the @request HttpRequest object > > entirely instead of the env and buf elements? > > I suppose that's more allocations, still; but could've > > been a smaller change. > > Ah, that’s a very good point. I think that would also have been a valid > approach but it does indeed add more allocations. If that approach would > be preferred, I think it can also be changed to that? > > I don’t really have a strong preference on which approach to take here, > do you? I was going to say I didn't have a preference and the current approach was fine... However, I just now realized now that clobbering+replacing all of @request is required. That's because env['rack.input'] is (Stream|Tee)Input, and that is lazily consumed and those objects keep state in @request (as the historically-named @parser) If we're to make env safe to be shipped off to another thread, then @request still needs to stick around to maintain state of env['rack.input'] until it's all consumed. It probably doesn't affect most apps out there that just decode forms via HTTP POST; but the streamed rack.input is something that's critical for projects that feed unicorn with PUTs via "curl -T" > > Oops, was that the integration tests in t/* ? > > Nope, looks like some platform behavior changes (tried on MacOS first). > I was able to get the tests running and working on Debian Buster this > morning before I sent a new version of the patch and they are all passing > there for me locally. Ah, no idea about MacOS or any proprietary OS; I've never considered them supported. But yeah, it should work on any GNU/Linux and Free-as-in-speech *BSDs -- unsubscribe: one-click, see List-Unsubscribe header archive: https://yhbt.net/unicorn-public/
