feat: add apiserver support to Python SDK #327
Conversation
masci
force-pushed
the
massi/apiserver-client
branch
2 times, most recently
from
4ff9346 to
2539adb
Compare
try checkpoint add asgiref to support async-to-sync: fix unit tests remove pydantic warning add unit tests for client fix mock path test model added tests and fix discovered bugs fix connection error handling fix bugs surfaced in end-to-end use explicity properties fix awaitable checks add instance method revert to return sync class extract base model use instance() method on models add e2e tests working state fix unit tests more fixes
masci
force-pushed
the
massi/apiserver-client
branch
from
2539adb to
e04269e
Compare
| session = await deployment.client.get_session(session_id=session_def.session_id) | ||
| for task_def in await session.get_tasks(): | ||
| tasks.append(task_def) | ||
| return JSONResponse(tasks) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Should this be a dict of session_id -> list[task] ? (Just thinking about building a UI that would use this function)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Good point, many return payloads of the apiserver API are not well thought, we can start fixing it from here
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I had a look and I realised if we change this we need to update the CLI as well and the PR would grow considerably. I propose we do that in a follow up.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Sounds good to me!
|
|
||
| Using the class constructor is not possible because we want to alter the class method to | ||
| accommodate sync/async usage before creating an instance, and __init__ would be too late. | ||
| """ |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ha, this docstring answered so many questions. Thank you!
| if asyncio.iscoroutinefunction(method) and not name.startswith("_"): | ||
| setattr(Wrapper, name, async_to_sync(method)) | ||
| # Static type checkers can't assess Wrapper is indeed a type[T], let's promise it is. | ||
| return cast(type[T], Wrapper) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
So just confirming how this works
- we define a class with all async methods
- if a flag is set, we apply this wrapper
- this wrapped only converts public methods
- type checkers and IDEs will see this as a sync method instead of async?
🤯
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Hmm, seems like IDE/type-checker assumes its always async (which tbh is fine)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ah correct, didn't think about that so to clarify, the static checker would be happy with await client.sync.apiserver.status() because the actual wrapping happens at runtime. I agree this would be fine, but I'll think about possible implications
Introducing apiserver support through a new Python SDK.
fixes #290
Basic usage
Streaming events