[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TINKERPOP-2774?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=18130701#comment-18130701
]
ASF GitHub Bot commented on TINKERPOP-2774:
-------------------------------------------
kenhuuu commented on PR #3527:
URL: https://github.com/apache/tinkerpop/pull/3527#issuecomment-6358300842
A concern I have is that the async code is built on top of the sync code and
in many cases share the same base class or implementation. The problem is there
are enough behavioral differences that I don't think we can claim that its a
drop-in replacement. I'm wondering if maybe it would have been better to just
have a clean divide to clearly communicate that there are differences between
the two. However, I like that this was done without breaking existing users.
Overall, I'm still fine with this PR moving forward so while I think it
might be an issue I don't think its a blocker.
> Full async/await support in gremlin-python
> ------------------------------------------
>
> Key: TINKERPOP-2774
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TINKERPOP-2774
> Project: TinkerPop
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: python
> Affects Versions: 3.5.3
> Reporter: Ken Hu
> Priority: Minor
>
> Recently, there have been multiple instances of users asking about issues
> with event loops and aiohttp. This discussion nearly always ends up with the
> user requesting for async/await support in gremlin-python. This means full
> compatibility with asyncio and not needing to use threads.
> Async/await support is also a feature that those using newer, asynchronous
> web frameworks are asking for as gremlin-python can be a performance
> bottleneck due to its lack of support for async/await.
> My intention is that we can use this issue as a means of gauging the interest
> from the community for this feature. If you are interested in having
> gremlin-python support async/await then please leave a comment below.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v10.3.26#10030026)
