Hey @kentonv_cf, are there any plans for a DESTROY function or something similar, that would all

Hey @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(

OBJECT_NAMESPACE.get(id).destroy()

OBJECT_NAMESPACE.get(id).destroy()

)? Or a way to remotely force a reset of the DO from

wrangler

wrangler

, without having to delete and recreate the instance?

HHello, I’m Allie!Hey @kentonv_cf, are there any plans for a **DESTROY** function or something sim...

kenton•8/3/21, 7:06 PM

If an object deletes all its storage (e.g. with

storage.deleteAll()

storage.deleteAll()

), then it will cease to exist once it shuts down.

Kkenton If an object deletes all its storage (e.g. with `storage.deleteAll()`), then it ...

Hello, I’m Allie!OP•8/3/21, 7:07 PM

How'd I miss that?

kenton•8/3/21, 7:07 PM

heh, it's definitely an unusual model and not obvious

kenton•8/3/21, 7:08 PM

but "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

Kkenton heh, it's definitely an unusual model and not obvious

Hello, I’m Allie!OP•8/3/21, 7:09 PM

Is there a plan for the ability to wipe them from

wrangler

wrangler

too? I sometimes make some changes to my code that might leave fragments in storage, so I want to start from scratch, without manually having to built that logic into the DO code.

Kkenton If an object deletes all its storage (e.g. with `storage.deleteAll()`), then it ...

asp•8/3/21, 7:21 PM

If I run

deleteAll()

deleteAll()

on a

idFromName()

idFromName()

-object, can it migrate to a new PoP if created again?

Aasp If I run `deleteAll()` on a `idFromName()`-object, can it migrate to a new PoP ...

Hello, I’m Allie!OP•8/3/21, 7:22 PM

AFAIK, the

deleteAll()

deleteAll()

function only works on

this.state.storage

this.state.storage

inside the Durable Object, not in the Worker itself.

HHello, I’m Allie!Is there a plan for the ability to wipe them from `wrangler` too? I sometimes ma...

kenton•8/3/21, 7:23 PM

You 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.

HHello, I’m Allie!AFAIK, the `deleteAll()` function only works on `this.state.storage` inside the ...

asp•8/3/21, 7:23 PM

I actually meant running the function inside an object created using

idFromName()

idFromName()

my fault.

Aasp I actually meant running the function inside an object created using `idFromName...

Hello, I’m Allie!OP•8/3/21, 7:24 PM

Yeah, it can recreate itself at another time, but without the previous storage.

asp•8/3/21, 7:24 PM

also at another PoP?

Kkenton You can delete the whole namespace and recreate it from wrangler. We plan later ...

Hello, I’m Allie!OP•8/3/21, 7:24 PM

Is that

wrangler publish --delete-class MyClass

wrangler publish --delete-class MyClass

, and

wrangler publish --new-class MyClass

wrangler publish --new-class MyClass

Aasp also at another PoP?

Hello, I’m Allie!OP•8/3/21, 7:25 PM

Yeah, the recreation should then be by the nearest POP that is a valid DO hosting colo.

HHello, I’m Allie!Is that `wrangler publish --delete-class MyClass`, and `wrangler publish --new-c...

kenton•8/3/21, 7:26 PM

right

Aasp If I run `deleteAll()` on a `idFromName()`-object, can it migrate to a new PoP ...

kenton•8/3/21, 7:29 PM

at 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.

kenton•8/3/21, 7:29 PM

(though if you deleted the entire namespace and created a new one, then nothing carries over)

asp•8/3/21, 7:32 PM

Alright, that makes sense!

WWallacy Two questions: 1) It wasn't clear to me whether it's now better to "await" a .pu...

Wallacy•8/3/21, 7:41 PM

@kentonv_cf How the in/out gates plays with the ctx.waitUntil? Will this break the rules?

WWallacy @kentonv_cf How the in/out gates plays with the ctx.waitUntil? Will this break t...

kenton•8/3/21, 7:58 PM

ctx.waitUntil()

ctx.waitUntil()

doesn't actually do anything in particular anymore. The object keeps running for at least 30 seconds after the last request whether or not use use waitUntil().

Kkenton `ctx.waitUntil()` doesn't actually do anything in particular anymore. The object...

Wallacy•8/3/21, 8:48 PM

But if we use storage operations on the waitUntil, we will be able to make a response without actually wait.

WWallacy But if we use storage operations on the waitUntil, we will be able to make a res...

kenton•8/3/21, 11:06 PM

Ah. 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.

Kkenton lol just came here to post that, you beat me