html_url,issue_url,id,node_id,user,created_at,updated_at,author_association,body,reactions,issue,performed_via_github_app https://github.com/simonw/sqlite-utils/issues/242#issuecomment-787532279,https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/sqlite-utils/issues/242,787532279,MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDc4NzUzMjI3OQ==,9599,2021-02-28T22:09:37Z,2021-02-28T22:09:37Z,OWNER,Microsoft's playwright Python library solves this problem by code generating both their sync AND their async libraries https://github.com/microsoft/playwright-python/tree/master/scripts,"{""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",817989436, https://github.com/simonw/sqlite-utils/issues/242#issuecomment-787198202,https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/sqlite-utils/issues/242,787198202,MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDc4NzE5ODIwMg==,9599,2021-02-27T22:33:58Z,2021-02-27T22:33:58Z,OWNER,"Hah or use this trick, which genuinely rewrites the code at runtime using a class decorator! https://github.com/python-happybase/aiohappybase/blob/0990ef45cfdb720dc987afdb4957a0fac591cb99/aiohappybase/sync/_util.py#L19-L32","{""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",817989436, https://github.com/simonw/sqlite-utils/issues/242#issuecomment-787195536,https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/sqlite-utils/issues/242,787195536,MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDc4NzE5NTUzNg==,9599,2021-02-27T22:13:24Z,2021-02-27T22:13:24Z,OWNER,Some other interesting background reading: https://docs.sqlalchemy.org/en/14/orm/extensions/asyncio.html - in particular see how SQLALchemy has a `await conn.run_sync(meta.drop_all)` mechanism for running methods that haven't themselves been provided in an async version,"{""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",817989436, https://github.com/simonw/sqlite-utils/issues/242#issuecomment-787190562,https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/sqlite-utils/issues/242,787190562,MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDc4NzE5MDU2Mg==,9599,2021-02-27T22:04:00Z,2021-02-27T22:04:00Z,OWNER,"From the poster here: https://github.com/sethmlarson/pycon-async-sync-poster/blob/master/poster.pdf ","{""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",817989436, https://github.com/simonw/sqlite-utils/issues/242#issuecomment-787186826,https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/sqlite-utils/issues/242,787186826,MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDc4NzE4NjgyNg==,9599,2021-02-27T22:01:54Z,2021-02-27T22:01:54Z,OWNER,`unasync` is an implementation of the exact pattern I was talking about above - it uses the `tokenize` module from the Python standard library to apply some clever rules to transform an async codebase into a sync one. https://unasync.readthedocs.io/en/latest/ - implementation here: https://github.com/python-trio/unasync/blob/v0.5.0/src/unasync/__init__.py,"{""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",817989436, https://github.com/simonw/sqlite-utils/issues/242#issuecomment-787175126,https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/sqlite-utils/issues/242,787175126,MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDc4NzE3NTEyNg==,9599,2021-02-27T21:55:05Z,2021-02-27T21:55:05Z,OWNER,"""how to use some new tools to more easily maintain a codebase that supports both async and synchronous I/O and multiple async libraries"" - yeah that's exactly what I need, thank you!","{""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",817989436, https://github.com/simonw/sqlite-utils/issues/242#issuecomment-787144523,https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/sqlite-utils/issues/242,787144523,MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDc4NzE0NDUyMw==,9599,2021-02-27T21:18:46Z,2021-02-27T21:18:46Z,OWNER,"Here's a really wild idea: I wonder if it would be possible to run a source transformation against either the sync or the async versions of the code to produce the equivalent for the other paradigm? Could that even be as simple as a set of regular expressions against the `await ...` version that strips out or replaces the `await` and `async def` and `async for` statements? If so... I could maintain just the async version, generate the sync version with a script and rely on robust unit testing to guarantee that this actually works.","{""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",817989436, https://github.com/simonw/sqlite-utils/issues/242#issuecomment-787142066,https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/sqlite-utils/issues/242,787142066,MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDc4NzE0MjA2Ng==,9599,2021-02-27T21:17:10Z,2021-02-27T21:17:10Z,OWNER,"I have a hunch this is actually going to be quite difficult, due to the internal complexity of some of the `sqlite-utils` API methods. Consider `db[table].extract(...)` for example. It does a whole bunch of extra queries inside the method - each of those would need to be turned into an `await` call for the async version. Here's the method body today: https://github.com/simonw/sqlite-utils/blob/09c3386f55f766b135b6a1c00295646c4ae29bec/sqlite_utils/db.py#L1060-L1152 Writing this method twice - looking similar but with `await ...` tucked in before every internal method it calls that needs to execute SQL - is going to be pretty messy. One thing that would help a LOT is figuring out how to share the majority of the test code. If the exact same tests could run against both the sync and async versions with a bit of test trickery, maintaining parallel implementations would at least be a bit more feasible.","{""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",817989436, https://github.com/simonw/sqlite-utils/issues/242#issuecomment-787120136,https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/sqlite-utils/issues/242,787120136,MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDc4NzEyMDEzNg==,9599,2021-02-27T19:04:47Z,2021-02-27T19:04:47Z,OWNER,"Another option here would be to add https://github.com/omnilib/aiosqlite/blob/main/aiosqlite/core.py as a dependency - it's four years old now and actively marinated, and the code is pretty small so it looks like a solid, stable, reliable dependency.","{""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",817989436, https://github.com/simonw/sqlite-utils/issues/242#issuecomment-787118691,https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/sqlite-utils/issues/242,787118691,MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDc4NzExODY5MQ==,9599,2021-02-27T18:53:23Z,2021-02-27T18:53:23Z,OWNER,"Datasette has its own implementation of a write queue for exactly this purpose - and there's no reason at all that should stay in Datasette rather than being extracted out and moved over here to `sqlite-utils`. One small concern I have is around the API design. I'd want to keep supporting the existing synchronous API while also providing a similar API with await-based methods. What are some good examples of libraries that do this? I like how https://www.python-httpx.org/ handles it, maybe that's a good example to imitate?","{""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",817989436,