fsspec / fsspec/filesystem_spec
Need AsyncAbstractBufferedFile or guidence
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- Python
- Stars
- 1.4k
- Forks
- 490
- Avg merge
- 2d 3h
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 38
Description
Context - I'm looking to use fsspec in async backend service, so I'm interested in implementing async versions (or replacements) of SFTP, FTP, and potentially others. However, for it to work well in this type of environment without blocking, it would need to support async in depth.
It looks like AsyncFileSystem would provide a standard interface for working with async versions of the functions (using an underscored version of the function ex _ls()), but when working with files, there doesn't seem to be a standard. The "http" protocol implementation includes async_fetch_all and async_fetch_range functions but S3FS does not, so it appears non-standard.
How do we see making file level functions like read work without blocking? Do we need a file level class similar to AsyncFileSystem?
Contributor guide
No contributing guide indexed for this repository
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
Research direction
Start by reading the AsyncFileSystem interface and comparing the HTTP protocol's async_fetch_all and async_fetch_range functions with S3FS. Determine whether file-level operations such as read need a standard async abstraction, and consider the implications for async SFTP and FTP implementations. Done means the interface and scope are clearly defined.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- python
- Domain
- backend-api-design
- Issue type
- Feature
- Difficulty
- 5/5
- Estimated time
- Over a week
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Needs clarification
- Newbie friendliness
- 25/100