feat(asyncFlow): Stopgap E support #9519
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
erights
force-pushed
the
markm-stopgap-asyncFlow-E
branch
from
a81e88c
to
190a294
Compare
Deploying agoric-sdk with
|
| Latest commit: |
c811934
|
| Status: | ✅ Deploy successful! |
| Preview URL: | https://f928622f.agoric-sdk.pages.dev |
| Branch Preview URL: | https://markm-stopgap-asyncflow-e.agoric-sdk.pages.dev |
erights
changed the title
erights
force-pushed
the
markm-stopgap-asyncFlow-E
branch
from
190a294
to
34520be
Compare
erights
added
the
asyncFlow
erights
force-pushed
the
markm-stopgap-asyncFlow-E
branch
from
34520be
to
a029c6f
Compare
|
Note to self: |
|
Ready for review again! We've decided that integration testing will proceed including this PR. Though possibly with the addition of a switch for turning it off (restoring the previous error behavior) if we decide such a switch is warranted. That can easily happen after this PR. |
dtribble
reviewed
Jun 26, 2024
dtribble
reviewed
Jun 27, 2024
dtribble
approved these changes
Jun 27, 2024
mergify bot
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 28, 2024
closes: #XXXX refs: #9519 ## Description While trying to debug #9519 , I'm seeing errors like ``` Error#20: {"type":1,"data":"CmgKIy9jb3Ntb3Muc3Rha2luZy52MWJldGExLk1zZ0RlbGVnYXRlEkEKGFVOUEFSU0FCTEVfQ0hBSU5fQUREUkVTUxISYWdvcmljMXZhbG9wZXJmdWZ1GhEKBXVmbGl4EggxMDAwMDAwMA==","memo":""} at parseTxPacket (file:///Users/markmiller/src/ongithub/agoric/agoric-sdk/packages/orchestration/src/utils/packet.js:87:14) ``` which only has the data without any message text saying what's wrong with the data. While fixing, also switched to a `Fail` to give us control over redaction. I made the conservative assumption that to not unredact the actual packet data, because I don't know why it should be public on the error even in non-debugging scenarios. If it should be unredacted, I can easily change to `${q(response)}`. Reviewers, please advise. Note that either way, the unredacted info will still show up in error logs, as above, and will still even show up on the error object in standard debugging configurations. ### Security Considerations Possibly repaired an unintended disclosure of info that should have been redacted, though the main motivation was adding an informative error message. ### Scaling Considerations none ### Documentation Considerations none ### Testing Considerations none ### Upgrade Considerations none
2 tasks
mergify bot
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 2, 2024
refs: #9541, #9322, #9519 ## Description add `getVBankAssetInfo()` method on agoric chain object. DRAFT until - [x] how to add chain-specific methods to return type of `getChain()`? - [x] refactor uses of `makeResumableAgoricNamesHack` to use this ### Documentation Considerations change is visible via `orchestration-api.d.ts` cc @dtribble ### Security Considerations none? ### Scaling Considerations returns O(n) data from O(1) args ### Testing Considerations perhaps not independently tested ### Upgrade Considerations not yet deployed
michaelfig
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 25, 2024
This reverts commit 4adf64f.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
closes: #XXXX
refs: #9322, #9299 #9443
Description
PR #9322 is supposed to provide production quality support for asyncFlow guest functions to use
E. It is being reviewed for that goal, and will not be merged until we think it meets that bar. However, we need to start integration testing of asyncFlow with orchestration, to spot mismatched assumptions we may have missed. For this purpose, we do not immediately need production qualityEsupport. That is the purpose of this PR. It starts as a copy of the code from #9322 but need only be evaluated as adequate for these stopgap purposes before being merged. This PR does NOT claim to f-i-x #9299 , leaving that job to remain with #9322Even though the requirements on this PR are so much lighter, reviewers should still look at the unresolved conversations on #9322 and determine if any of those need to first be solved even in this PR.
Security Considerations
When merging stopgap code to master, there is always the danger that it might be used as if it production code. We need to remember not to do so, instead waiting for #9322 to do the job for real.
Scaling Considerations
none
Documentation Considerations
just as this stopgap unblocks integration testing, it also likely unblocks documenting how to use asyncFlow, both in general and for orchestration.
Testing Considerations
As a stopgap, this PR does not need the rigorous testing that #9322 should have.
Upgrade Considerations
We need to not use this stopgap for production purposes.