open-feature / open-feature/python-sdk
[Multi-provider] Gaps identified relative to js-sdk reference implementation
Nadie ha tomado este issue todavía.
- Lenguaje dominante
- Python
- Estrellas
- 111
- Forks
- 44
- Merge medio
- 2 h 37 min
- PR fusionados (30 d)
- 14
Descripción
Context
We conducted a cross-SDK comparison of all MultiProvider implementations using the js-sdk as the reference. The Python MultiProvider was implemented in #511 and is functional for basic use cases, but we identified several gaps relative to the reference implementation. Some of these were noted as future work in the original PR.
Note: Tracking forwarding is blocked by SDK-level tracking support (#374).
Gaps
1. Event aggregation and status tracking (High)
The MultiProvider passes child provider events through directly via attach/detach with no aggregation. If one child emits PROVIDER_ERROR while another is READY, both events propagate independently. There is no composite status, so consumers cannot determine the overall health of the MultiProvider.
Expected behavior:
- Maintain a per-provider status map
- Compute an aggregate status using "worst-wins" precedence:
FATAL > NOT_READY > ERROR > STALE > READY - Only emit an event when the aggregate status actually changes (deduplication)
- Always forward
PROVIDER_CONFIGURATION_CHANGEDevents as a pass-through
Reference: js-sdk status-tracker.ts, dotnet-sdk HandleProviderEventAsync / DetermineAggregateStatus
2. Per-provider hook isolation during evaluation (High)
Hooks are aggregated into a flat list via get_provider_hooks(), meaning ALL child provider hooks run for ALL evaluations regardless of which provider actually evaluated the flag. The js-sdk reference runs each provider's hooks only during that provider's evaluation, with an isolated context copy to prevent cross-provider mutation.
Expected behavior:
- Run each child provider's hooks only when that specific provider is being evaluated
- Isolate hook context per-provider to prevent cross-provider mutation
- Execute the full before/after/error/finally lifecycle per-provider
Reference: js-sdk hook-executor.ts, go-sdk isolation.go, dotnet-sdk ProviderExtensions.EvaluateAsync
3. FirstMatchStrategy semantics (Medium)
The current FirstMatchStrategy.should_use_result() accepts any result where reason != Reason.ERROR. It does not distinguish FLAG_NOT_FOUND from other error types. The js-sdk reference treats FLAG_NOT_FOUND as "skip to next provider" but halts on any other error.
Expected behavior:
FLAG_NOT_FOUNDshould cause fallthrough to the next provider- Any other error (e.g.
PARSE_ERROR,GENERAL) should halt evaluation and surface that error - A successful result should be returned immediately
Reference: js-sdk strategies/first-match-strategy.ts
4. Add FirstSuccessfulStrategy (Medium)
Only FirstMatchStrategy exists. There is no FirstSuccessfulStrategy, which is more resilient by skipping all errors (including non-FLAG_NOT_FOUND errors) and continuing to the next provider.
Expected behavior:
- Return the first completely successful result (no error at all)
- Skip any provider that returns an error or throws, regardless of error type
- If all providers fail, collect and report all errors
Reference: js-sdk strategies/first-successful-strategy.ts
5. Add ComparisonStrategy (Medium)
There is no ComparisonStrategy for evaluating all providers and comparing results (useful for migration validation and consistency checks).
Expected behavior:
- Evaluate all providers (ideally in parallel)
- If all providers agree on the value, return it
- If providers disagree, call an optional
onMismatchcallback and return the designated fallback provider's result - If any provider errors, collect and report all errors
- Constructor accepts a
fallbackProviderand optionalonMismatchcallback
Reference: js-sdk comparison-strategy.ts, go-sdk comparison_strategy.go, dotnet-sdk ComparisonStrategy.cs
6. True parallel evaluation (Low)
The run_mode="parallel" option currently executes providers sequentially in a for-loop despite the name. The only difference from "sequential" is the lack of early exit. The docstring acknowledges this as a planned future enhancement.
Expected behavior:
- When
run_mode="parallel", evaluate all providers concurrently (e.g. viaasyncio.gatherorThreadPoolExecutor) - Collect all results, then let the strategy determine the final result
Reference: js-sdk parallel evaluation in flagResolutionProxy
Blocked / Deferred
- Tracking forwarding: Requires SDK-level tracking support first (#374)
Related Issues
- #511 — Original multi-provider implementation
- #374 — Implement tracking in Python
Spec Reference
https://openfeature.dev/specification/appendix-a/#multi-provider
Guía de contribución
Primeros pasos
- Lee el issue completo y luego la guía de contribución del proyecto.
- Comenta en el issue que vas a ocuparte — evita que dos personas hagan lo mismo.
- Haz un fork del repositorio y trabaja en una rama.
- Abre un pull request que haga referencia al número del issue.
Línea de trabajo
Comienza con la implementación de Python MultiProvider de #511 e inspecciona su gestión de eventos, get_provider_hooks(), FirstMatchStrategy y las rutas de evaluación de run_mode. Compara cada brecha con las referencias enlazadas de js-sdk, go-sdk y dotnet-sdk. Se considera terminado cuando se haya implementado y probado el comportamiento especificado de estado, hooks, estrategia, comparación y evaluación en paralelo, dejando el seguimiento aplazado detrás de #374.
Escrito por el modelo de indexación a partir del texto del issue.
Evaluación
- Stack tecnológico
- python
- Área
- backend
- Tipo de issue
- Nueva funcionalidad
- Dificultad
- 5/5
- Tiempo estimado
- Más de una semana
- Estado de actividad
- Estancado
- Claridad
- Bastante claro
- Aptitud para principiantes
- 25/100