fix(server): reject if error in search or recommend #6616
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
This pull request is automatically built and testable in CodeSandbox. To see build info of the built libraries, click here or the icon next to each commit SHA. Latest deployment of this branch, based on commit 1d82767:
|
1 task
shaejaz
approved these changes
Apr 4, 2025
dhayab
approved these changes
Apr 7, 2025
|
I want to evaluate the feedback in #6525 a little more, it seems that if the search throws there's still some sort of (in)finite nesting of the error going on, although search seems to be called only once |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Summary
Refactors InitialisePromise to use the waitForResults of InstantSearch.js, which correctly rethrows errors if they happen in search, composition or recommend.
Be careful when refactoring to ensure I didn't misunderstand the intent of the original code, as I don't remember why we didn't use InstantSearch' waitForResults in the first place. There may be a subtle difference between the functions I didn't catch.
Result
fixes #6525