-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 305
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
Port summonerd 63 changes to main #3497
Merged
conorsch
merged 17 commits into
main
from
3446-port-summonerd-63-changes-to-main-via-rebase
Dec 8, 2023
Merged
Port summonerd 63 changes to main #3497
conorsch
merged 17 commits into
main
from
3446-port-summonerd-63-changes-to-main-via-rebase
Dec 8, 2023
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
(also center contribution text)
This reverts commit bb795bd. The `wait_for_crash` method doesn't work correctly and will generate new crashes while waiting to check if the view service crashed. We need to use the code we actually did the dry run with. As per this morning's discussion, making the view service more robust is something we should work in, but it's something that requires design work and code review and should not be dropped only into the summonerd service without testing.
The previous reverted commit also included unrelated HTML/CSS changes that presumably should be included.
phase1_contributions has a fk constraint to phase1_contribution_data so it needs to be populated first
the transition query will need to populate phase_2_contribution_data first in order for the FK constraint from phase2_contributions to be valid
Basically, we should treat this as a rare but expected thing, and blame and strike the participant for this, rather than bring down the server as if it were an unexpected failure.
The better code pattern for this would be to blanket-handle errors in the method, but at the moment it seems better to just fix the current issue.
cronokirby
approved these changes
Dec 8, 2023
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.
This looks good to me. I agree with option 2 of using a non-load balanced endpoint being a good idea.
conorsch
deleted the
3446-port-summonerd-63-changes-to-main-via-rebase
branch
December 8, 2023 21:07
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Closes #3446. This PR rebases
summonerd-feature-branch
on top of currentmain
. A single commit was excluded due to conflicts: that from #3291. We definitely want a plan for handling the split-brain, so we can either 1) separately apply that commit, resolving conflicts manually; or 2) configure summonerd to use a single, non-LB grpc endpoint on 64. In the interest of time, I suggest option 2.I'm also open to squashing this down into a single commit, but up to you, @cronokirby.