| Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Age | Files | Lines |
|---|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
The interface is similar to the one exposed by `arti-client`: it
internally uses postage::watch to give a series of events showing
when a bootstrap status is changing.
Thanks to the existing state/driver separation in the DirMgr design
we don't need much new logic: each download state needs to expose
(internally) how far along it is in its download, which the
bootstrap code passes to the DirMgr if it has changed.
I believe that in the long run, we'll probably want to expose more
(or different) information here, and we'll want to process it
differently. With that in mind, I've made the API for
`DirBootstrapStatus` deliberately narrow, so that we can change its
of its internal later on without breaking code that depends on it.
(The information exposed by this commit is not yet summarized in
`arti-client`.)
Part of #96.
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This approach tries to preserve the current interface, but uses a
counter-based event backend to implement a coalescing stream of
events that can be represented as small integers. The advantage
here is that publishing events no longer needs to be a blocking
operation, since there is no queue to fill up.
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
This is still not as soon as I'd like: a real change here will require
refactoring DirMgr::notify().
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
We can't change the authorities while in-flight: that would be pretty
miserable to implement.
Similarly we can't change the cache while in-flight.
Everything else should be fair game, though there are a couple of tricky
bits. I've tried to document those.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This patch doesn't actually make anything reconfigurable, but it
does create an API that will tell you "you can't change the value of
that!" If the API looks reasonable, I can start making it possible
to change the values of individual items.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
We want to only use TODO in the codebase for non-blockers, and open
tickets for anything that is a bigger blocker than a TODO. These
XXXXs seem like definite non-blockers to me.
Part of arti#231.
|
| | |
|
| |\ |
|
| | |
| |
| |
| |
| | |
Make sure that we can change elements, and we can reconstruct builders
that give us the same thing.
|
| |/ |
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
(We keep routerdescs in the schema, since we don't want _that_ to
fragment.)
Part of #125.
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
These test our download schedules, resetting to the original state,
and storing downloaded objects.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Previously our code would clear the 'pending' flag on a consensus
only when a _downloaded_ md made it become usable.
Closes #199.
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
The futures::lock::Mutex was unnecessary, since we never held it
when we were suspending.
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
Previously we'd say that we were "waiting for the other process to
bootstrap" even if it was already bootstrapped: and we wouldn't
actually declare success when it was done.
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
Previously we would sometimes fail to report that we had
successfully bootstrapped.
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
(Previously we'd report it as successful even if the inner download
task was a failure.)
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
|
|
This will cause some pain for now, but now is really the best time
to do this kind of thing.
|
