Support asynchronous transactions #258
Draft
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Since Room uses an asynchronous-only connection pool, integrating it into the PowerSync SDK would be more efficient if we didn't have to call
runBlocking
around every statement.Making query methods asynchronous also simplifies some interfaces, since it means that the top-level
Queries
and inner transactions can share asynchronous methods.So, this PR:
ScopedReadQueries
andScopedWriteQueries
interfaces. Theget
,getAll
andgetOptional
methods have been moved toScopedReadQueries
;execute
is now part ofScopedWriteQueries
.Queries
interface now extends fromScopedWriteQueries
.PowerSyncDatabaseImpl
to await for initialization and then inInternalDatabaseImpl
), most methods are now implemented directly inQueries
ontop of theuseConnection
interface.useConnection
does that for all methods.I have marked the synchronous callbacks as
@Deprecated
. I'm not sure if we want to be that aggressive or if we want to keep supporting both methods for longer. I'm slightly leaning toward eventually removing them given the nicer unified interface and reduced complexity.