Skip to content
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

[Wf-Diagnostics] Incorporate blob size limits in diagnostics workflow #6583

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jan 6, 2025

Conversation

sankari165
Copy link
Member

What changed?
Diagnostics workflow includes blob size limit related failures

Why?
adding the blob size usecase for diagnostics

How did you test it?
unit tests

Potential risks

Release notes

Documentation Changes

for _, issue := range issues {
if issue.InvariantType == failure.ActivityFailed.String() || issue.InvariantType == failure.WorkflowFailed.String() {
if issue.InvariantType == failure.ActivityFailed.String() || issue.InvariantType == failure.WorkflowFailed.String() || issue.InvariantType == failure.DecisionCausedFailure.String() {
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'd recommend making a function like haveFailureMetadata, otherwise it becomes a long if-list and it is not super-clear why these particular issues are special?

Copy link
Member

@dkrotx dkrotx left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

generally, it is good, but I recommend considering a different data-model if there are more (special) cases like this BlobSizeLimit forseen.

RootCauseType: rc.RootCause.String(),
})
}
if rc.RootCause == invariant.RootCauseTypeBlobSizeLimit {
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

A bit unexpected data-model here: I would expect individual rootcause to populate their data, and then this data to be marshalled similarly across different rootCauses, but here different fields of the failureRootCauseResult are populated depending on different type.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

agreed. will discuss offline to refactor this better

@sankari165 sankari165 merged commit cc73b75 into cadence-workflow:master Jan 6, 2025
17 checks passed
@sankari165 sankari165 deleted the CDNC-11732 branch January 6, 2025 10:13
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants