feat(storage): implement API, request builders, integration tests#5957
feat(storage): implement API, request builders, integration tests#5957vsharonlynn wants to merge 12 commits into
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Code Review
This pull request implements bidirectional streaming writes (Bidi Write) for Google Cloud Storage, introducing the AppendableObjectWriter along with request builders OpenAppendableObject and ReopenAppendableObject to support appending data to objects. It includes a background Worker to manage the gRPC stream, a Connector to handle connection handshakes and routing redirects, and comprehensive unit and integration tests. The review feedback highlights two opportunities in connector.rs to improve error handling by replacing .expect() calls with safe error propagation using ? when converting parameters to proto format.
Codecov Report❌ Patch coverage is Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #5957 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 97.72% 97.48% -0.24%
==========================================
Files 242 250 +8
Lines 60882 62351 +1469
==========================================
+ Hits 59495 60782 +1287
- Misses 1387 1569 +182 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Harness. 🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
e844df2 to
7e41183
Compare
7e41183 to
5e066c1
Compare
|
I ran The output is: |
coryan
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is too large for a single PR, please split.
Sorry about this. I have chained PRs, this has changes from #5956. Because my branches are in my fork, I can't diff this branch from the #5956 branch in a PR into this repository. One way I found on how to view only the changes for this PR is to select the commits that don't belong to the previous PR:
Happy to split it up if this still looks too large.
Another way is for us to wait until the previous PR is merged, then I'll rebase this before you take a look. Please let me know if there is a more efficient way to do this... Thank you. |
Yes, that works for me.
Support for stacked PRs (allegedly in the works at GitHub) may help, but I do not think that is available to us yet. Normally we keep stacked PRs as draft. They are useful to give reviewers a sense of the overall change, but too large to review. Reviewing after a rebase is far more practical. |

This PR comes after PR #5956.