-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 54
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
make balancer ids constant from the perspective of the monolith #1411
make balancer ids constant from the perspective of the monolith #1411
Conversation
Important Auto Review SkippedAuto reviews are disabled on this repository. Please check the settings in the CodeRabbit UI or the To trigger a single review, invoke the Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media? TipsChatThere are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:
Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments. CodeRabbit Commands (invoked as PR comments)
Additionally, you can add CodeRabbit Configration File (
|
Codecov ReportAttention: Patch coverage is
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #1411 +/- ##
================================================
- Coverage 56.1624% 56.1352% -0.0272%
================================================
Files 163 163
Lines 24828 24840 +12
Branches 1432 1432
================================================
Hits 13944 13944
- Misses 10830 10842 +12
Partials 54 54 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
I also added a |
aac606b
to
13b0135
Compare
Since you fixed the commit history I just have a bunch of unresolved import errors. I'm not sure if that is only on my end. I also just realized I can't do this inside this function since it needs to be async to await it. Would making this an async function break functionality? Does it even make sense to send the balancer id when a monolith is added? It kind of does to me. Will also try and fix the test if this is actually the right way to go about this. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The balancer id needs to be global and constant throughout the time the balancer is alive. In other words, the balancer must generate the id once and once only. All areas where the id is accessed should return the initial value. I'm expecting something along the lines of static x = Lazy<...>
from once_cell
somewhere in here.
Okay, not a clue on how to actually send this. I've been taking a look at this |
We already send messages on
|
Okay, will take a look now. |
Know this one is going to fail as well but I feel like this is closer. Ideally I want to send it in that loop right after what I wrote. I was trying to do have another |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yeah this is the right direction
I think this is the relevant part of why the tests are failing. Could you take a look? |
|
I run them locally as well and the same two don't pass consistently. Otherwise, if you think it isn't relevant/not an issue I think this one might be ready. |
The problem is with the harness tests. Since the balancer now sends a message to the monolith on connect the This appears to make a lot of harness tests fail consistently on my machine |
rebase this PR to fix the tests |
Okay, will do. |
b16def7
to
518d7e7
Compare
Could you do a rerun on the rust tests? |
Think this one is good to go. Only thing is the messages get double logged See here.. I see why, but what would the logging get changed into in the Also, I guess I screwed up the rebase this time as well. It did tell me it worked, but then I had the two new commits you added as pending to be pushed (Since I wanted to be able to rerun the CI stuff). When that happens do you just force push? |
yes, after a rebase, force push |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Looks good.
e3a170d
to
4d5fd93
Compare
Passing run #1291 ↗︎
Details:
Review all test suite changes for PR #1411 ↗︎ |
closes #1338