Retry logic #135
Retry logic #135
Conversation
doc doc
remove import remove wrapped
src/safe_provider.rs
Outdated
| pub async fn subscribe_blocks( | ||
| &self, | ||
| ) -> Result<Subscription<N::HeaderResponse>, RpcError<TransportErrorKind>> { | ||
| let provider = self.provider.clone(); | ||
| self.retry_with_timeout(|| async { provider.subscribe_blocks().await }).await | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| #[allow(clippy::missing_errors_doc)] | ||
| pub(crate) async fn retry_with_timeout<T, F, Fut>( |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Suggestion: instead of relying on closures, you could implement a local trait extension on all F: Fn() -> Fut, potentially avoiding provider clones, something like the following pseudocode:
trait RetryableWithTimeout<T, Fut> {
async fn retry_with_timeout(&self) -> Result<T, RpcError<TransportErrorKind>>;
}
impl<T, Fut> RetryableWithTimeout<T, Fut> for F
where
F: Fn() -> Fut
Fut: Future<Output = Result<T, RpcError<TransportErrorKind>>>,
{
//...
}
src/safe_provider.rs
Outdated
| //! ```rust,no_run | ||
| //! use alloy::{ | ||
| //! network::Ethereum, | ||
| //! providers::{RootProvider, WsConnect}, | ||
| //! rpc::client::ClientBuilder, | ||
| //! }; | ||
| //! use event_scanner::safe_provider::SafeProvider; | ||
| //! use std::time::Duration; | ||
| //! | ||
| //! async fn example() -> Result<(), Box<dyn std::error::Error>> { | ||
| //! let provider = RootProvider::<Ethereum>::new( | ||
| //! ClientBuilder::default().ws(WsConnect::new("wss://localhost:8000")).await?, | ||
| //! ); | ||
| //! let safe_provider = SafeProvider::new(provider) | ||
| //! .with_max_timeout(Duration::from_secs(30)) | ||
| //! .with_max_retries(5); | ||
| //! | ||
| //! let block = safe_provider.get_block_by_number(12345.into()).await?; | ||
| //! Ok(()) | ||
| //! } | ||
| //! ``` |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
- This should be marked to run in doc tests, to ensure it compiles (otherwise we might forget to change it when API changes).
- You can prefix import lines with
#to hide them from previews, while still passing doc tests. See example below:
Code:
Preview:
There was a problem hiding this comment.
okay very interesting
Took me a while to realise the doc comment has to be above the actual object (ofc..)
Also i adding no run still compiles the test https://doc.rust-lang.org/rustdoc/write-documentation/documentation-tests.html?highlight=no_run#attributes it just doesnt 'run' the code. Im not sure whats better but since we dont actually want to connect to a provider for the doc test we can leave it to no run
lmk what you think
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actually removed the doc completely - i dont think we should expose the safe provider to outside the crate, therefore it doesnt make sense
Co-authored-by: Nenad <[email protected]>
2 participants
Resolves #112