tonic VS miri

Use tonic-build directly from Rust.

} // Omit the remaining code and refer to the example in Tonic: https://github.com/hyperium/tonic/blob/master/examples/src/multiplex/server.rs ```

If I’m not misunderstanding, you could both decode the gRPC protobuf AND write to delta lake in Rust. Tonic, Delta-rs.

Original post: https://github.com/hyperium/tonic/issues/1405. Cross-post here in case the problem is not specific to tonic.

Tonic

Just to double check Is this the correct repo?

Wasm isn't involved much actually. Basically, the frontend asks the backend to perform a gRPC call on its behalf using Tauri events. They are like named channels on which you can send any serde-compatible value. But the backend is a normal Rust program so there are no constraints there. I use prost-reflect to encode/decode Protobuf messages according to Protobuf descriptors loaded at runtime and make the actual requests using tonic from the tokio ecosystem. prost-reflect is necessary because, normally, tonic expects the Protobuf descriptor to be known at compile time so it can make some code generation behind the scenes.

You could have a look at gRPC i.e. https://github.com/hyperium/tonic

Looking at this example code: https://github.com/hyperium/tonic/blob/master/examples/src/tower/server.rs

The remaining gap is remote actors, since you still need some kind of serialization between them, and take your pick of standards for that one such as gRPC using Tonic.

Provenance is a dynamic property of pointer values. The actual underlying rules that a program must follow, even when using raw pointers and `unsafe`, are written in terms of provenance. Miri (https://github.com/rust-lang/miri) represents provenance as an actual value stored alongside each pointer's address, so it can check for violations of these rules.

Lifetimes are a static approximation of provenance. They are erased after being validated by the borrow checker, and do not exist in Miri or have any impact on what transformations the optimizer may perform. In other words, the provenance rules allow a superset of what the borrow checker allows.

There has been discussion of doing this with MIRI, which would be easier than all of rustc.

This issue has been fixed: https://github.com/rust-lang/miri/issues/2964

Actually, I've done more advanced tests with MIRI (see https://github.com/rust-lang/miri/issues/2920 for example) which allowed me to fix some issues. I've also made the code compatible with loom, but I didn't found the time yet to write and execute loom tests. That's on the TODO-list, and I need to track it with an issue too.

He is one of the big brains behind Miri, which is a interpreter that runs on the MIR (compiler representation between human code and asm/machine code) and detects undefined behavior. Super useful tool for language safety, pretty interesting on its own.

I would also run your tests in Miri (https://github.com/rust-lang/miri) to try to cover more bases.

You can run miri and it will tell you if the given run triggered any undefined behavior. It will not analyze it for every possible use of the code, but checking for the presence of this specific issue using it should be fairly simple.

If you do encounter a piece of code on which TB performs much worse than SB, do submit it as an issue! There was one recently and we massively improved TB performance on this case by improving garbage collection.