8000 Switch to asyncio · Issue #2288 · python-telegram-bot/python-telegram-bot · GitHub
[go: up one dir, main page]
Skip to content
8000

Switch to asyncio #2288

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom
Closed
Bibo-Joshi opened this issue Jan 3, 2021 · 5 comments
Closed

Switch to asyncio #2288

Bibo-Joshi opened this issue Jan 3, 2021 · 5 comments
Labels
🛠 breaking change type: breaking 🛠 refactor change type: refactor
Milestone
v20.0a0

Comments

@Bibo-Joshi
Copy link
Member
Bibo-Joshi commented Jan 3, 2021 •
edited
Loading

After some internal discussion we decided that it's time to make the switch to asyncio and we will do so in the next major release (v14). This is not due in the forseable future and this issue just summarizes some notes on that.

As this is a major breaking change, the community should be involved. What we do is:

  • Make an announcement way ahead of release time & pin this issue
  • Maintaining backward compatibility will probably be a lot of work and we already made the experience with use_context that this gives trouble. Therefore we will not offer a compatibility layer
  • However, we should give the commutiy the chance to do so on their own. This will be achieved by making an announcement when the asyncio-branch is ready and giving the community some time to prepare before we actually release

Currently updates are handled one after the other by default and changing that would mean major breaking changes. Especially ConversationHandler usually relies on updates being processed one after the other. Noam sketched something how we could make dispatcher handle some updates asyncio and some sync. We should use that idea to make run_async basically work the same after the switch. We already have Defaults.run_async in place, so it's easy to make everything completely asynico if wanted.

Another rough thought in this direction: One could want updates to pass through the groups synchronously, while still processing multiple updates at the same time. We could add a setting for that and in Dispatcher do something like

if self.process_async:
    run_but_dont_await(self.process_update(update))
else:
    await self.process_update(update)

See here for some discussion.

Switching to asyncio will probably be a good time to switch to another lib for making requests. We can choose that work better with asyncio and doesn't need to be vendored. Candidates include

  • httpx
  • tornado+pycurl with the benefit that curl is the defacto standard (though latter would be a hassle for windows users)
  • aiohttp. open question: does it support connection reusal? upside would be that users wouldn't have to install another lib for making requests, if they need that.

Requirements for a requests-lib to fulfill:

  • connection reusal
  • working behind proxies: http, socks5 + dns resolution over the proxy
  • Would be great if it supports Google App Engine as urllib3 currently does

First feedback on the announcement included Flask not supporting asyncio natively. As Flask is one of the more common setups PTB is used in, we could provide an example on how to use asycnio PTB with flask.

Edit: We should probably still suggest to use a framework that supports asyncio natively, e.g. Quart

Check #2351 for more community feedback
@Bibo-Joshi Bibo-Joshi added 🛠 refactor change type: refactor 🛠 breaking change type: breaking labels Jan 3, 2021
@Bibo-Joshi Bibo-Joshi added this to the v14 milestone Jan 3, 2021
@serjan-nasredin
Copy link

Yes! Good idea. I tried to rewrite, but I only made one commit ... and dropped it :)

@Bibo-Joshi

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view
@Kolippolip

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view
@Bibo-Joshi

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view
@python-telegram-bot python-telegram-bot deleted a comment from Kolippolip Jan 9, 2021
@Bibo-Joshi Bibo-Joshi mentioned this issue Jan 9, 2021
Closed
@Poolitzer
Copy link
Member

Regarding aiohttp, I had a quick glance through their docs and they definitly support it, keepalive flag is a parameter.

But there is aio-libs/aiohttp#2323...

@Bibo-Joshi Bibo-Joshi mentioned this issue Feb 16, 2021
Closed
@Bibo-Joshi Bibo-Joshi mentioned this issue Feb 27, 2021
Closed
@Bibo-Joshi Bibo-Joshi mentioned this issue Oct 14, 2021
Merged
27 tasks
@github-actions github-actions bot locked and limited conversation to collaborators May 1, 2022
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
🛠 breaking change type: breaking 🛠 refactor change type: refactor
Projects
None yet
Milestone
v20.0a0
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

WIP Ptb async python-telegram-bot/python-telegram-bot
4 participants
@Bibo-Joshi @Poolitzer @serjan-nasredin @Kolippolip
0