Diesel-Async support

[johnchildren]

I tend to use diesel-async for connections now, so it might be nice to support that. Though perhaps it ought to be a separate crate.

[cdxker]

Hey thinking to tackle this task. Thinking to make a separate diesel-async-tracing create. Are there any pitfalls / hold backs of using diesel-async that I should be aware of?

[johnchildren]

Hey, I think a new crate would be a good idea, possibly though it might be achievable through tackling this task: https://github.com/CQCL/diesel-tracing/issues/25

I haven't looked into it enough though and it will be quite a big refactor. I would be tempted to also make an attempt tomorrow as I have some free time, but I'm also keen to see other implementations!

[weiznich]

I just want to leave a comment here: Yes the Instrumentation infrastructure is supposed to be shared between diesel and diesel-async so I believe it would be the correct way forward to restructure this crate to use that hook based approach instead.

At the time of writing there is already a stable diesel release containing this feature + I plan to release a corresponding diesel-async version soon.

[johnchildren]

Looks like support has landed, I have started work on moving to the hook based approach a bit locally. Open to any contributions who beat me to it however.