[async hooks] Criteria for exiting experimental
Nessuno ha ancora preso questa issue.
Valutazione
- Difficoltà
- 5/5
- Tempo stimato
- Più di una settimana
- Idoneità per principianti
- 20/100
- Tipo di issue
- Funzionalità
- Chiarezza
- Da chiarire
- Stato di attività
- Ferma
- Stack tecnologico
- node.js
- Ambito
- backend-api-design
Direzione di ricerca
Start with the tracking issue #124 and the related discussions in #107, TSC #340, diagnostics #144, and diagnostics #188. Review the open questions around formal semantics, performance, and API stability; this issue is complete when the working group agrees on and records concrete criteria for leaving experimental status.
Scritto dal modello di indicizzazione a partire dal testo della issue.
Descrizione
At a previous WG meeting we discussed the task (assigned to me) of figuring out the criteria for async_hooks to exit experimental. While #124 can continue to be the tracking issue keeping track of the concrete work that needs to happen, I am opening this issue as a discussion what being stable entails.
To become stable, the API must be well understood, well specified and well tested – but those are subjective.
-
At previous WG meetings, in #107 and in https://github.com/nodejs/TSC/issues/340#issuecomment-383972054, @mike-kaufman and @mrkmarron have expressed the need (albeit not directly) for more formally defined semantics – perhaps at the language level – rather than the semantics being defined by implementation. I share this sentiment. We have gotten this concept wrong before, an it is a foundational concept for the language that needs some more rigorous treatment rather than being implementation defined. @mike-kaufman, @mrkmarron: LMK if I am inferring incorrectly.
-
Similarly, the V8 team (e.g. @bmeurer) has expressed concerns about semantics being inadequately specified which is a barrier to VM being able to optimize safely. A recent example of this is the recent regression in Node 10 where async_hooks behavior changed in a way to break existing use-cases in a major way. The regression was a result of optimization work V8 did in order to improve async await performance. The optimizations V8 did were reasonable as per the spec. However, since Promise Hooks is neither well specified, nor well tested it is hard to know what behaviors are observable part of the Promise Hook contract and what aspects are ancillary. What all can the VM optimize? IMO, at a minimum the Promise Hooks API needs to be better specified (as if it was a language spec – even if it is not) so that we can have adequate levels of fuzz testing in V8 and a strong contract between Node and V8 on the semantics.
-
Well-understood semantics: I am still making discoveries about async-hooks behavior that are surprising to me. For example, recently I learned that for certain kinds of promises the resolve hook will be called multiple times – what kind of promises this applies to left as an exercise for the reader. As a group we need to decide whether the semantics have gotten enough vetting for us to be comfortable calling it stable.
-
Performance: AsyncHooks (esp. PromiseHooks), when enabled have a fair amount of performance impact and there are anecdotal reports from both extremes. We have not concluded https://github.com/nodejs/diagnostics/issues/144 with data from the real world – although I know people are working on getting this data. More abstractly, what is acceptable level of performance impact? Should this even be part of the exit criteria?
-
API Stability: To improve performance, we may need to change API as a result of the changes suggested in https://github.com/nodejs/diagnostics/issues/188. There is also a branch that @mcollina is working on that adds currentResource as a parameter to each callback. It is not clear whether we are API stable at this point.
- Lingua principale
- Nessun dato sulla lingua
- Stelle
- 550
- Fork
- 69
- Metriche di merge delle PR
- Nessuna PR unita negli ultimi 30g
Guida per i contributori
Apri la guida per i contributori
Come iniziare
- Leggi tutta la issue e poi la guida ai contributi del progetto.
- Commenta sulla issue per dire che te ne occupi tu — evita che due persone facciano lo stesso lavoro.
- Fai un fork del repository e lavora su un branch.
- Apri una pull request che faccia riferimento al numero della issue.
Altre issue di nodejs/diagnostics
-
Difficoltà 1/5 Meno di un'ora Idoneità per principianti 65/100
nodejs/diagnostics#648 · 3 commenti ·
-
Difficoltà 1/5 Meno di un'ora Idoneità per principianti 20/100
nodejs/diagnostics#690 · 1 reazione ·
-
Difficoltà 1/5 Meno di un'ora Idoneità per principianti 20/100
nodejs/diagnostics#689 ·
-
Difficoltà 1/5 Meno di un'ora Idoneità per principianti 25/100
nodejs/diagnostics#688 ·
-
Difficoltà 5/5 Più di una settimana Idoneità per principianti 25/100
nodejs/diagnostics#687 ·
Tutte le issue di nodejs/diagnostics
Issue simili
-
Difficoltà 2/5 1-3 ore Idoneità per principianti 75/100
mksglu/context-mode#1200 ·
-
Difficoltà 2/5 1-3 ore Idoneità per principianti 75/100
-
Difficoltà 2/5 1-3 ore Idoneità per principianti 70/100
-
clawsweeper:needs-maintainer-review clawsweeper:needs-product-decision clawsweeper:no-new-fix-pr impact:auth-provider issue-rating: 🌊 off-meta tidepool P2
Difficoltà 1/5 Meno di un'ora Idoneità per principianti 80/100
-
Difficoltà 2/5 1-3 ore Idoneità per principianti 75/100