Which ctx should I use in run parameter of hystrix.Do function of hystrix-go package? The ctx from the upper level, or context.Background()?
Thanks.
package main
import(
"context"
"github.com/myteksi/hystrix-go/hystrix"
)
func tb(ctx context.Context)error{
return nil
}
func ta(ctx context.Context){
hystrix.Do("cbName", func()error{
// At this place, the ctx parameter of function tb,
// Should I use ctx from ta function, or context.Background()?
return tb(ctx)
}, nil)
}
func main(){
ta(context.Background())
}
If you're using contexts, it seems to me like you should using hystrix.DoC. There's no reason to use anything than whatever context passed through, since Do is synchronous, and you would like whatever cancellations, deadlines (and whatever else is attached to your context) to be preserved inside this code.
func ta(ctx context.Context) {
err := hystrix.DoC(ctx, "cbName", func(ctx context.Context) error {
... code that uses ctx here.
}, nil)
// handle err, which may be a hystrix error.
}
It's hard to say if this is actually different from calling hystrix.Do, but this potentially allows hystrix to use your context, to add deadlines/cancellations itself.
Always use the context.Context coming from the upper level as a parameter wherever you can. It allows an end to end mechanism to control request, all the caller has to do is cancel, or invoke timeout on the initial ctx, and it will work for the complete request path.
The initial context passed can depend on your requirement. If you're not sure about what context to use initially, context.TODO can be a good option till you're sure.
Related
Assuming that I have a function that sends web requests to an API endpoint, I would like to add a timeout to the client so that if the call is taking too long, the operation breaks either by returning an error or panicing the current thread.
Another assumption is that, the client function (the function that sends web requests) comes from a library and it has been implemented in a synchronous way.
Let's have a look at the client function's signature:
func Send(params map[string]string) (*http.Response, error)
I would like to write a wrapper around this function to add a timeout mechanism. To do that, I can do:
func SendWithTimeout(ctx context.Context, params map[string]string) (*http.Response, error) {
completed := make(chan bool)
go func() {
res, err := Send(params)
_ = res
_ = err
completed <- true
}()
for {
select {
case <-ctx.Done():
{
return nil, errors.New("Cancelled")
}
case <-completed:
{
return nil, nil // just to test how this method works
}
}
}
}
Now when I call the new function and pass a cancellable context, I successfully get a cancellation error, but the goroutine that is running the original Send function keeps on running to the end.
Since, the function makes an API call meaning that establishing socket/TCP connections are actually involved in the background, it is not a good practice to leave a long-running API behind the scene.
Is there any standard way to interrupt the original Send function when the context.Done() is hit?
This is a "poor" design choice to add context support to an existing API / implementation that did not support it earlier. Context support should be added to the existing Send() implementation that uses it / monitors it, renaming it to SendWithTimeout(), and provide a new Send() function that takes no context, and calls SendWithTimeout() with context.TODO() or context.Background().
For example if your Send() function makes an outgoing HTTP call, that may be achieved by using http.NewRequest() followed by Client.Do(). In the new, context-aware version use http.NewRequestWithContext().
If you have a Send() function which you cannot change, then you're "out of luck". The function itself has to support the context or cancellation. You can't abort it from the outside.
See related:
Terminating function execution if a context is cancelled
Is it possible to cancel unfinished goroutines?
Stopping running function using context timeout in Golang
cancel a blocking operation in Go
What is the default mode in which network requests are executed in GoColly? Since we have the Async method in the collector I would assume that the default mode is synchronous.
However, I see no particular difference when I execute these 8 requests in the program other than I need to use Wait for async mode. It seems as if the method only controls how the program is executed (the other code) and the requests are always asynchronous.
package main
import (
"fmt"
"github.com/gocolly/colly/v2"
)
func main() {
urls := []string{
"http://webcode.me",
"https://example.com",
"http://httpbin.org",
"https://www.perl.org",
"https://www.php.net",
"https://www.python.org",
"https://code.visualstudio.com",
"https://clojure.org",
}
c := colly.NewCollector(
colly.Async(true),
)
c.OnHTML("title", func(e *colly.HTMLElement) {
fmt.Println(e.Text)
})
for _, url := range urls {
c.Visit(url)
}
c.Wait()
}
The default collection is synchronous.
The confusing bit is probably the collector option colly.Async() which ignores the actual param. In fact the implementation at the time of writing is:
func Async(a ...bool) CollectorOption {
return func(c *Collector) {
c.Async = true // uh-oh...!
}
}
Based on this issue, it was done this way for backwards compatibility, so that (I believe) you can pass an option with no param at it'll still work, e.g.:
colly.NewCollector(colly.Async()) // no param, async collection
If you remove the async option altogether and instantiate with just colly.NewCollector(), the network requests will be clearly sequential — i.e. you can also remove c.Wait() and the program won't exit right away.
I want to write a WithContext method for a struct and am taking inspiration from net/http's Request.WithContext.
My question is: why does Request.WithContext panic if the context is nil:
func (r *Request) WithContext(ctx context.Context) *Request {
if ctx == nil {
panic("nil context")
}
...
}
And should mine as well?
For more context on why I want to create a WithContext method: I am implementing an interface that does not provide a context parameter in its signature but believe the implementation requires it.
More specifically, I am writing a Redis backend for gorilla/session using the official Redis client for Go, where the Get and Set methods take context.Context.
The idea is that my redis store will be shallow copied with the new context object, when needed, and then used:
type redisStore struct {
codecs []securecookie.Codec
backend Backend // custom interface for Redis client
options *sessions.Options
ctx context.Context
}
func (s *redisStore) WithContext(ctx context.Context) *redisStore {
if ctx == nil {
panic("nil context")
}
s2 := new(redisStore)
*s2 = *s
s2.ctx = ctx
return s2
}
// Backend
type Backend interface {
Set(context.Context, string, interface{}) error
Get(context.Context, string) (string, error)
Del(context.Context, string) error
}
The purpose of panicking is to "fail fast" and reject a nil context without changing the function signature.
If the function does not panic then it must return error in order to reject a bad input:
func (r *Request) WithContext(ctx context.Context) (*Request, error) {
if ctx == nil {
return nil, errors.New("nil ctx")
}
...
}
And then who calls this function must handle the error to avoid using an invalid request:
request, err = request.WithContext(nil)
if err != nil {
}
By handling the error you are introducing a control flow branch, and you lose method chaining. You also cannot immediately use WithContext return value into a function parameter:
// cannot do, because WithContext returns an error too
data, err := fetchDataWithContext(request.WithContext(ctx), otherParam)
Also it would create an error instance that will be eventually garbage collected. This all is cumbersome, poor usability and unnecessary alloc simply for saying "don't give me a nil context".
About creating a redis store with a context, the context documentation is clear:
Package context defines the Context type, which carries deadlines, cancellation signals, and other request-scoped values across API boundaries and between processes.
The important detail is request-scoped. So setting a context in the redis client itself is contrary to this recommendation. You should pass context values at each get/set call.
The context of an HTTP request is canceled if the client closes the connection. When the context is canceled, all its child contexts are also canceled, so a nil context would panic then. Because of this, you cannot pass a nil context to WithContext.
Whether or not your redis store should panic depends on how you are going to use that context. It is usually not a good idea to include a context in a struct. One acceptable way of doing that is if the struct itself is a context. Contexts should be created for each call, should live for the duration of that call, and then thrown away.
I want to be able to pass function name to gin.Engine route handler. I have the following code;
// status service
type StatusService struct {
App *gin.Engine
}
func (s *StatusService) Ping(ctx *gin.Context) {
ctx.JSON(200, gin.H{
"message": "pong",
})
}
app := gin.Default()
// define services
statusService := &services.StatusService{
App: app,
}
ss := make(map[string]interface{})
ss["auth"] = statusService
app.GET("/ping", ss["auth"].Ping)
The compiler gives the following error;
./app.go:60: ss["auth"].Ping undefined (type interface {} has no field or method Ping)
Any ideas about how to fix that?
interface{} works for just about any type, the problem is that you've failed to assert which type the thing is. In this case you would need something like... ss["auth"].(*StatusService).Ping(myCtxInstance). This answer has a more thorough example which I'll refrain from duplicating; Go map of functions
Couple other things; if your real use case is as simple as your example just stop what you're doing and add func(ctx *gin.Context) as a second argument. Also, depending on the nature of the functions you want to use (like if they all have the same args and return types) then you might want to use a second arg for the delegates, map[string]func(argumentType) would be more appropriate.
The design you currently have pushes all errors to runtime which obviously is less desirable than the compile time safety you'd get from either of the options I touched on above.
I want to determine a simple and useful pattern for user authentication in a web app being written in golang.
I have come up with two patterns. First one is enabling the programmer to have his functions separate form the authentication logic, and has cleaner HandleFunc parts in main() that one can see only by loking main() to see what parts are under authentication control.
Second one is making programmer include a decision in every function deal with authentication required urls. An if statement checks by a authp() function defined else where.
Which one is better pattern for such necessity?
What are the better patterns for this job?
Is it even possible to pass a function to http.HandleFunc that has signature other than func urlFunc (ResponseWriter, *Request) bu like func urlFunc (successFunc, failFunc) or func urlFunc (ResponseWriter, *Request, successFunc, failFunc) as in authenticationGateKeeper function of First Way below, if not a suitable workaround for that?
//First Way
package main
func authGateKeeper(successFunc, failFunc) {
if (authp()) {
successFunc
} else {
failFunc
}
}
func authp() boolean {
//authentication logic, db query, or session check etc.
}
//usage in main
http.HandleFunc("/", authGateKeeper)
//Second Way; other alternative, in each function check pattern
func f(w, r) {
if (authp()) {
//function's processes
} else {
//the fail case function or processes
}
}
func authp() boolean {
//authentication logic, db query, or session check etc.
}
//usage in main
http.HandleFunc("/", f)
There are many ways to spin this, and it's arguable whether one is outright "better". I'd strongly suggest writing some middleware that wraps your routes and enforces the check, calling the wrapped handler only on success.
Note that I'm going to make a few assumptions here as you haven't told us how you're managing sessions (cookies? server-side?) and/or what kind of authorization you might need on top of authentication.
// Middleware - a function that sits in the 'middle' of your request processing.
func RequireAuth(h http.Handler) http.Handler) {
fn := func(w http.ResponseWriter, r *http.Request) {
// Assuming gorilla/sessions
session, err := store.Get("name", r)
if err != nil {
// Raise HTTP 500
return
}
// We'll assume you're storing the userID in the cookie|server session
// upon login elsewhere.
id := session.Values["userID"]
// Probably returns a *yourapp.User
user, err := db.GetUser(id)
if err != nil {
// Raise HTTP 500
return
}
if user == nil {
http.Error(w, http.StatusText(http.StatusUnauthorized), http.StatusUnauthorized)
// Don't forget these 'naked' returns - if you miss one, your
// handler will keep processing beyond the error and result in
// unintended side effects
return
}
// Further checks here - i.e. checking user.Active == true, etc.
// The userID matches one in the DB, so let's proceed
h.ServeHTTP(w, r)
}
return http.HandlerFunc(fn)
}
// And in your router - assuming just vanilla net/http
http.Handle("/", RequireAuth(yourHandlerFunc))
http.Handle("/", RequireAuth(someOtherHandler))
// Note that using gorilla/mux or goji can help give you "subrouters" so you
// don't have to wrap every single route with your middleware (messy, error prone)
I'd also suggest some reading on Go middleware1 composition2 which will help you in the future.
If you want to call a custom error page, just write a handler - e.g. UnauthorizedHandler that satisfies http.Handler and just call UnauthorizedHandler.ServeHTTP(w, r) instead of http.Error along the way.