Description
Currently, the GRPCStatus
is not related to Status
defined in google/rpc/status.proto.
According to Richer Error Model specification, the repeated google.protobuf.Any details
field
enables servers to return and clients to consume additional error details expressed as one or more protobuf messages.
This is beneficial if you want to go beyond the standard gRPC codes error model and start providing more detailed information.
Preferred solution
The GRPCStatus
gains the details
field.
Alternative
Since the details
field is transported as trailing metadata:
The protobuf binary encoding of this extra error information is provided as trailing metadata in the response.
We can workaround the missing details
field. The trailingMetadata
is available in all calls, for example:
grpc-swift/Sources/GRPC/AsyncAwaitSupport/GRPCAsyncUnaryCall.swift
Lines 76 to 82 in 716d6d4
The only inconvenient part is that async/await wrappers do not expose it in any way.
grpc-swift/Sources/GRPC/AsyncAwaitSupport/GRPCClient+AsyncAwaitSupport.swift
Lines 158 to 178 in 716d6d4
However, the library has GRPCStatusAndTrailers
struct that could be used here or perhaps even deeper in the codebase.
grpc-swift/Sources/GRPC/GRPCStatusAndMetadata.swift
Lines 21 to 32 in 716d6d4
Then the async/await wrappers (or maybe at some lower level) instead of simply propagating the error, could transform it to status and then add metadata and throw it, something like:
let status = (error as! GRPCStatusTransformable).makeGRPCStatus()
throw GRPCStatusAndTrailers(status: status, trailers: call.trailingMetadata)
The GRPCStatusAndTrailers
could conform to GRPCStatusTransformable
for backward compatibility.
This would be an easy win, and allow library users to easily obtain detailed error information.
Questions
- Do you plan to support the Rich Error Model in the long term?
- What do you think about the alternative solution (for example the one above) in the short term for async/await APIs?
Activity