Skip to content
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.

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

Add async support #622

Open
maovidal opened this issue Feb 26, 2024 · 3 comments
Open

Add async support #622

maovidal opened this issue Feb 26, 2024 · 3 comments

Comments

@maovidal
Copy link

Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.

Sometimes the network traffic affects the response time of the queries to our database. As the DB is blocking, the rest of our app becomes quite unresponsive in those situations.

I wonder if this is something still under consideration: cloudant/python-cloudant#211

Thanks!

@ricellis
Copy link
Member

Async support for Python is still under consideration. The HTTP client stack and request/response handling are provided by the IBM Cloud Python SDK core. I am aware of an internal request tracking async support for that and I've asked for an update, but AFAIK it is not planned at this point.

In the meantime if you are an IBM Cloudant customer and have concerns about query performance you can contact support and ask for an engagement with our client architecture team who may be able to help with optimization.

Also, whilst it probably doesn't help if you require a python stack, our Node and Java SDKs do currently support asynchronous requests if you have flexibility in your language choice.

@maovidal
Copy link
Author

Thank you for your response. I'll keep an eye on the SDK.

@Ousret
Copy link

Ousret commented Mar 1, 2024

Hello,

They could, thinking about ibm-cloud-sdk-core, switch from requests to niquests and easily propose an async interface without breaking changes.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants