feat: implement WithInfiniteRetry() option #38
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
- Offer the possibility to retry indefinitely with the last backoff duration set - Works with any backoff duration strategy - Add a 'retries' parameters to the function passed into RunCtx() args, so that the called function know the number of current retries
eapache
reviewed
Dec 5, 2023
This reverts commit 70ab61c.
Contributor
Author
|
Hey @eapache 👋 |
eapache
reviewed
Dec 12, 2023
Owner
|
Minor nits, but mostly looks good to me now. Thanks! |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
3 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Hi,
First of all, thank you very much for this library that I'm using.
I'm submitting this pull request to you, which adds a feature I need in some of my projects, namely the ability to retry indefinitely.
Due to transactional constraints, in some cases, I cannot afford for a transaction not to be executed, and I believe that using your retrier coupled with good monitoring should handle the job more cleanly than a panicOnError().
That's why the request includes the following modifications: