lol just came here to post that, you beat me
lol just came here to post that, you beat me
KYes, all the storage ops accept bypass flags. (For , they go into the existing options object. For others, it's a new parameter.)
K(now that the post is out, I need to update the docs...)
KHey @vans163 , do you see the same problem in a regular stateless worker (not a Durable Object)? Could you write a minimal self-contained worker that reproduces the problem which we could debug?
Kactually this should be a thread
WTwo questions:
1) It wasn't clear to me whether it's now better to "await" a .put() operation or rely on automatic await before the final response.
2) What's the behavior of ctx.waitUntil(()=> storage.put()) ?
1) It wasn't clear to me whether it's now better to "await" a .put() operation or rely on automatic await before the final response.
2) What's the behavior of ctx.waitUntil(()=> storage.put()) ?
HHey @kentonv_cf, are there any plans for a DESTROY function or something similar, that would allow you to terminate a DO instance and wipe its data()? Or a way to remotely force a reset of the DO from
wrangler
KIf an object deletes all its storage (e.g. with ), then it will cease to exist once it shuts down.
HHow'd I miss that?
Kheh, it's definitely an unusual model and not obvious
Kbut "implicit create, implicit delete" turns out to work really well because it means the clients don't have to check if an object exists or try to synchronize deletions... they just send messages to the object
HIs there a plan for the ability to wipe them from
wrangler
AIf I run on a
idFromName()AFAIK, the function only works on inside the Durable Object, not in the Worker itself.
KYou can delete the whole namespace and recreate it from wrangler. We plan later to add the ability to list existing objects and perhaps to schedule a function to run on all objects.
AI actually meant running the function inside an object created using
idFromName()- my fault.
HYeah, it can recreate itself at another time, but without the previous storage.
Aalso at another PoP?
HIs that , and ?
HYeah, the recreation should then be by the nearest POP that is a valid DO hosting colo.
Kat present it's likely to stay at the same pop. To move to a new pop, you'd have to wait until all cached traces of the old object have been wiped from the system, which could take a while. But we're still working on automatic migration.
K(though if you deleted the entire namespace and created a new one, then nothing carries over)
AAlright, that makes sense!
W@kentonv_cf How the in/out gates plays with the ctx.waitUntil? Will this break the rules?
Kctx.waitUntil()But if we use storage operations on the waitUntil, we will be able to make a response without actually wait.
KAh. Yes, deferring code to run after the response has already been returned is inherently unreliable, because in the case of a failure, no one finds out. E.g. if the power goes out, the task might never execute, but since the user already received a response, they won't know. Output gates can't help with this, since they can't predict what you're going to do in the future after you return the response. Generally, I don't recommend doing this, except maybe for stuff that is fine to be unreliable, like logging.
CVery good writeup about an exciting design. Can't wait to test. Just bogged down with other stuff 
ADoes anyone have numbers on roundtrip time to Durable Objects living on the other side of the world?
Kwhat is the difference between idFromName() and idFromString() and how long value (max. length) I could put there?
KidFromString()id.toString()idFromName()in retrospect, the naming could have been better.
Kthanks!
AidFromHex()
CLAX to KIX is ~ 130 ms, LAX to FRA ~170 Where are you? I can send you a link to try
AI'm in Denmark, so I hit CPH by default. Though, due to VPN on my PC, I mostly connect to AMS.
AMy latency to CPH is ~10 ms and AMS is ~25 ms.
CTry these for latency testing:
Click "test latency" a few times, and maybe reload to make a new request.
USJPEUClick "test latency" a few times, and maybe reload to make a new request.
CLooks like your VPN is slowing down things maybe? FRA should be a lot less.
AOh, I'm on a mobile connection right now - that's definitely why. Will test it in ~30 min when I'm home 
COh that is a problem too of course. In LA I sometimes get single digit latencies 
(on fibre at home)
(on fibre at home)Aon fibre at homeI "only" have 1000/500 over COAX (DOCSIS 3.1) :/
ASpeeds are great, but latency doesn't get lower than ~10 ms to anywhere
A@codefrau I launched the links on my PC now (with VPN)
CSo that's the connection from Amsterdam then - can you try without VPN? 50 ms to FRA still seems like a lot
C32ms, that looks better
ASo 32 ms is roundtime from my PC to FRA via CPH?
Cyes
Cthe worker is in CPH and the DO in FRA