-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 78
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
chore: fix session pool del before lock #367
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Changes from all commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
|
@@ -70,7 +70,8 @@ def __init__(self, username, password, space_name, addresses): | |
self._close = False | ||
|
||
def __del__(self): | ||
self.close() | ||
if hasattr(self, '_lock'): | ||
self.close() | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. the root cause is when init the pool if the address is invalid, would raise exception prefer move the exception at the end of init function There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. the current change it's also ok for me. |
||
|
||
def init( | ||
self, | ||
|
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@ | ||
[project] | ||
name = "nebula3-python" | ||
version = "3.8.2" | ||
version = "3.8.3" | ||
description = "Python client for NebulaGraph v3" | ||
authors = [ | ||
{name = "vesoft-inc", email = "[email protected]"}, | ||
|
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
|
@@ -26,7 +26,7 @@ | |
|
||
setup( | ||
name="nebula3-python", | ||
version="3.8.2", | ||
version="3.8.3", | ||
license="Apache 2.0", | ||
author="vesoft-inc", | ||
author_email="[email protected]", | ||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
this should be fine as we have test coverage running over 3.7 w/o PDM already, plus PDM now is 3.8+ actually.