You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
I'm trying to use after_this_websocket to cleanup some long-running tasks that go alongside websocket connections. It appears this isn't called reliably enough for me to use it as a cleanup. My server has a memory leak right now and we think it's due to this.
Environment:
Python version: Tox 310 311
Quart version: 0.19.5 (current git tip)
I have reproduced this behaviour in the Quart tests: willstott101#1 I hope that's enough info to quickly confirm if this is a bug or accepted behaviour. The docs recommend we always re-raise the cancelled error in websockets which makes it impossible for us to use after_this_websocket for cleanup.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
There doesn't seem to be a teardown_request. Would it be more intuitive for both after_this_request and after_this_websocket to be usable for cleanup. I don't understand the benefit of teardown_websocket and after_this_websocket being different things.
I can experiment with teardown_websocket - but would a PR which combines teardown_websocket and after_this_websocket be considered?
I'm trying to use
after_this_websocket
to cleanup some long-running tasks that go alongside websocket connections. It appears this isn't called reliably enough for me to use it as a cleanup. My server has a memory leak right now and we think it's due to this.Environment:
I have reproduced this behaviour in the Quart tests: willstott101#1 I hope that's enough info to quickly confirm if this is a bug or accepted behaviour. The docs recommend we always re-raise the cancelled error in websockets which makes it impossible for us to use
after_this_websocket
for cleanup.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: