Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

stream: enable autoDestroy by default #30623

Closed
wants to merge 8 commits into from

Conversation

ronag
Copy link
Member

@ronag ronag commented Nov 24, 2019

Enable autoDestroy by default.

semver-major

Refs: #30621

Checklist
  • make -j4 test (UNIX), or vcbuild test (Windows) passes
  • tests and/or benchmarks are included
  • documentation is changed or added
  • commit message follows commit guidelines

@nodejs-github-bot nodejs-github-bot added the lib / src Issues and PRs related to general changes in the lib or src directory. label Nov 24, 2019
@ronag
Copy link
Member Author

ronag commented Nov 24, 2019

This will need CITGM

@mcollina
Copy link
Member

Can you open up a tracking issues with all the node core implementations that would need to be updated to autoDestroy: true?

@ronag
Copy link
Member Author

ronag commented Nov 24, 2019

Can you open up a tracking issues with all the node core implementations that would need to be updated to autoDestroy: true?

I think you mean autoDestroy: false? I've already updated them in this PR. Or am I missing/misunderstanding something?

@mcollina
Copy link
Member

I think we should migrate all of those you have set to false in this PR to true before node v14 is cut.

@ronag
Copy link
Member Author

ronag commented Nov 24, 2019

I think we should migrate all of those you have set to false in this PR to true before node v14 is cut.

#30625

Though realistically I don't think we will be able to do this for internal/http2/core.js.

Just to clarify. Are you proposing we do not merge this PR until we've migrated?

@mcollina
Copy link
Member

I’m fine with landing this before that happens.

@lpinca lpinca added the semver-major PRs that contain breaking changes and should be released in the next major version. label Nov 24, 2019
@ronag ronag mentioned this pull request Nov 24, 2019
6 tasks
@ronag
Copy link
Member Author

ronag commented Dec 1, 2019

@Trott: I think this needs a CITGM?

@mcollina: Do you think you can approve this PR or is there something further that needs to be addressed?

Copy link
Member

@mcollina mcollina left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

lgtm

@mcollina
Copy link
Member

mcollina commented Dec 1, 2019

cc @nodejs/tsc this needs a review.

@Trott
Copy link
Member

Trott commented Dec 2, 2019

@nodejs-github-bot
Copy link
Collaborator

@BridgeAR
Copy link
Member

@nodejs/tsc this has three LGs but it needs one more LG from the TSC. PTAL

@BridgeAR
Copy link
Member

Seems like this has failing test cases.

@ronag
Copy link
Member Author

ronag commented Dec 25, 2019

Seems like this has failing test cases.

Not sure how to resolve those. I'm running on OSX and I can't reproduce the OSX failures. Are we sure the CI is correct?

@BridgeAR
Copy link
Member

@ronag these two tests fail (even on OSX):

  • test/parallel/test-stream-catch-rejections.js
  • test/parallel/test-stream-writable-write-cb-twice.js

You can click on the failed results here and you should get an overview of Jenkins with the specific Job that was run. E.g., https://ci.nodejs.org/job/node-test-commit-osx/nodes=osx1011/30941/.

You can click on the specific part of the job and see e.g., the failure output:
https://ci.nodejs.org/job/node-test-commit-osx/nodes=osx1011/30941/testReport/junit/(root)/test/parallel_test_stream_catch_rejections/
https://ci.nodejs.org/job/node-test-commit-osx/nodes=osx1011/30941/testReport/junit/(root)/test/parallel_test_stream_writable_write_cb_twice/

@ronag
Copy link
Member Author

ronag commented Dec 25, 2019

@BridgeAR: Something is wrong here test-stream-catch-rejections doesn't even exist. Did this CI run against a different branch/PR?

@ronag
Copy link
Member Author

ronag commented Dec 25, 2019

Ah, it does a merge against master. I'll rebase this and re-run tests.

@ronag ronag force-pushed the stream-auto-destroy branch 2 times, most recently from 052da2a to c3fda6b Compare December 25, 2019 20:04
@ronag
Copy link
Member Author

ronag commented Dec 25, 2019

@BridgeAR: another CI please

@nodejs-github-bot
Copy link
Collaborator

@ronag
Copy link
Member Author

ronag commented Dec 26, 2019

rebased

@Trott Trott added author ready PRs that have at least one approval, no pending requests for changes, and a CI started. notable-change PRs with changes that should be highlighted in changelogs. labels Dec 27, 2019
@ronag ronag mentioned this pull request Dec 29, 2019
4 tasks
@nodejs-github-bot
Copy link
Collaborator

@ronag
Copy link
Member Author

ronag commented Jan 1, 2020

rebased to fix conflicts

@nodejs-github-bot
Copy link
Collaborator

@nodejs-github-bot

This comment has been minimized.

@nodejs-github-bot

This comment has been minimized.

@nodejs-github-bot
Copy link
Collaborator

nodejs-github-bot commented Jan 2, 2020

BridgeAR pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jan 3, 2020
PR-URL: #30623
Refs: #30621
Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Matteo Collina <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Ruben Bridgewater <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Rich Trott <[email protected]>
@BridgeAR
Copy link
Member

BridgeAR commented Jan 3, 2020

Landed in 4bec6d1 🎉

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
author ready PRs that have at least one approval, no pending requests for changes, and a CI started. lib / src Issues and PRs related to general changes in the lib or src directory. notable-change PRs with changes that should be highlighted in changelogs. semver-major PRs that contain breaking changes and should be released in the next major version.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants