The concept of mutexes and locks

[roxblnfk]

Related to #462

Several methods have been added to the Workflow facade:

Workflow::mutex(): MutexInterface creates a mutex. The mutex can be yielded from a Workflow, meaning execution will continue if the mutex is not locked.

The Mutex class has a lock() method that returns a Promise. This means yield $mutex->lock() will wait for the lock is acquired.

The Mutex class also has tryLock(), unlock(), and isLocked() methods, which do not imply Await behavior.

---

Additional syntactic sugar:

Run locked

Workflow::runLocked(MutexInterface $mutex, callable $callable): PromiseInterface

Executes a function if the given Mutex is not locked and locks the Mutex for the duration of the function's execution.

[vercel]

The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for Git ↗︎

Name	Status	Preview	Comments	Updated (UTC)
php	✅ Ready (Inspect)	Visit Preview	💬 Add feedback	Sep 10, 2024 11:06am

[wolfy-j]

Maybe we can make name optional?

[wolfy-j]

I would avoid having conditional mutexes, we can always achieve that by using await + mutex

[Sushisource]

Maybe we can make name optional?

I would avoid having conditional mutexes, we can always achieve that by using await + mutex

+1 to both of these. I was going to say don't do name at all, but then I saw PHP's built-in mutex takes a name which I find really odd, but, I agree it makes sense to match that API.

As for the conditional, yeah, user can always use await & we haven't provided that in other langs either so we can stick with the basic APIs.

The only other thing I would add is a tryLock method which the other SDKs support.

[roxblnfk]

I was going to say don't do name at all, but then I saw PHP's built-in mutex takes a name which I find really odd

We can definitely get rid of the name. SyncMutex is not a PHP standard; it's just a third-party extension, and we don't have to consider it.

[roxblnfk]

PR updated according to the review

---

If we don't use the mutex name, we can simplify everything:

• Remove the MutexInterface
• Remove the Workflow::mutex() method, and create Mutex using the constructor new Mutex()

[Sushisource]

This approach is looking good to me 👍