Skip to content

Conversation

cgwalters
Copy link
Collaborator

Just like GetBlob, the size might not be known. In the case of this API, one use case is being driven from e.g. https://github.com/cgwalters/cstor-dist
which is exposing a HTTP API, so it's really useful for us to have the size here so that server can in turn provide it via its own Content-Length if available.

Just like GetBlob, the size might not be known. In the case
of this API, one use case is being driven from e.g.
https://github.com/cgwalters/cstor-dist
which is exposing a HTTP API, so it's really useful for
us to have the size here so that server can in turn provide
it via its own `Content-Length` if available.

Signed-off-by: Colin Walters <[email protected]>
Copy link

@gemini-code-assist gemini-code-assist bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Summary of Changes

Hello @cgwalters, I'm Gemini Code Assist1! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed!

This pull request enhances the get_raw_blob API to gracefully handle scenarios where the size of the fetched blob is not immediately known. By introducing an optional return type for the blob length, the system can now communicate the absence of size information, improving the API's robustness and utility for external services that rely on this data.

Highlights

  • get_raw_blob function signature change: The get_raw_blob function now returns Option for the blob size instead of u64, allowing it to properly handle cases where the size is unknown (represented by -1 from the underlying GetRawBlob call).
  • Robust size handling: The change ensures that the GetRawBlob API can correctly propagate an unknown blob size, which is crucial for consumers like HTTP servers that might need to provide a Content-Length header.
Using Gemini Code Assist

The full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips.

Invoking Gemini

You can request assistance from Gemini at any point in your pull request via creating an issue comment (i.e. comment on the pull request page) using either /gemini <command> or @gemini-code-assist <command>. Below is a summary of the supported commands.

Feature Command Description
Code Review /gemini review Performs a code review for the current pull request in its current state.
Pull Request Summary /gemini summary Provides a summary of the current pull request in its current state.
Comment @gemini-code-assist Responds in comments when explicitly tagged, both in issue comments and review comments.
Help /gemini help Displays a list of available commands.

Customization

To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a .gemini/ folder in the base of the repository. Detailed instructions can be found here.

Limitations & Feedback

Gemini Code Assist may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments. If you're interested in giving your feedback about your experience with Gemini Code Assist for Github and other Google products, sign up here.

You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with the Gemini Code Assist IDE Extension.

Footnotes

  1. Review the Privacy Notices, Generative AI Prohibited Use Policy, Terms of Service, and learn how to configure Gemini Code Assist in GitHub here. Gemini can make mistakes, so double check it and use code with caution.

@cgwalters
Copy link
Collaborator Author

This is a semver break, but we already bumped semver in #91

Copy link

@gemini-code-assist gemini-code-assist bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Code Review

This pull request correctly adapts the get_raw_blob function to handle cases where the blob size is unknown, indicated by a -1 value from the proxy. The function signature is updated to return an Option<u64> for the size, which is a breaking but necessary change. The implementation correctly deserializes the potentially negative size as an i64 and then converts it to an Option<u64>. The changes are sound and well-implemented.

@cgwalters
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Followup to #97

@cgwalters cgwalters enabled auto-merge September 4, 2025 19:30
@cgwalters cgwalters requested a review from jeckersb September 4, 2025 19:30
@cgwalters cgwalters merged commit e4196da into bootc-dev:main Sep 4, 2025
2 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants