[Catalyst] patch to C::P::SubRequest / RFC

[luke saunders]

Hi John,

>
> I'm using subrequests quite extensively in my
> application so I'll test out your patch and see if
> anything breaks :)
>

That would be great, thanks.

> I've actually been trying to work out a patch for this
> that spawns off a new thread.  I've been using
> subrequest for a quasi portal like approach to
> building my site and I find that performance suffers
> when there are too many subrequests.  --john
>

Wouldn't spawning a new thread make it slower? Since the calling
thread still needs to wait for the spawned thread to return.

> --- luke saunders <luke.saunders at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I've noticed that if, using C::P::SubRequest,
> > action_a subreqs to
> > action_b and action_b does $c->res->status(400) then
> > action_a will
> > also return a 400 unless overridden. This is also
> > the case for any
> > other changes to $c->res that the subreq'd action
> > might make.
> >
> > This is because C::P::SubRequest doesn't give the
> > subreq'd action its
> > own Response object. There was some discussion on
> > #catalyst where it
> > was pretty much decided that this was wrong.
> >
> > Attached is a patch which changes SubRequest.pm so
> > that it passes the
> > subreq'd action a shiny new Response object to
> > prevent it stamping all
> > over the original. It's feasible that the calling
> > action may actually
> > be interested in the subreq'd action's Response
> > object (for status
> > code checking etc) and for this reason if subreq is
> > called in list
> > context the subreq'd action's Response object is
> > returned as the
> > second return value: my ($body, $res) =
> > $c->subreq(...)
> >
> > Ideally, the subreq'd action should probably get a
> > whole $c of its
> > own, but this would require much work. So I propose
> > that this will do
> > for now .
> >
> > There may be a problem with backwards compatibility
> > if this patch is
> > actually applied, so maybe this new behaviour should
> > only occur if
> > some flag is set or if subreq_local (or whatever) is
> > called instead.
> >
> > Any thoughts?
> > > _______________________________________________
> > List: Catalyst at lists.rawmode.org
> > Listinfo:
> > http://lists.rawmode.org/mailman/listinfo/catalyst
> > Searchable archive:
> >
> http://www.mail-archive.com/catalyst@lists.rawmode.org/
> > Dev site: http://dev.catalyst.perl.org/
> >
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> http://mail.yahoo.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> List: Catalyst at lists.rawmode.org
> Listinfo: http://lists.rawmode.org/mailman/listinfo/catalyst
> Searchable archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/catalyst@lists.rawmode.org/
> Dev site: http://dev.catalyst.perl.org/
>