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

Add execute function to handle the workflow instance operation #13610

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Feb 24, 2023

Conversation

ruanwenjun
Copy link
Member

Purpose of the pull request

Brief change log

Verify this pull request

This pull request is code cleanup without any test coverage.

(or)

This pull request is already covered by existing tests, such as (please describe tests).

(or)

This change added tests and can be verified as follows:

(or)

If your pull request contain incompatible change, you should also add it to docs/docs/en/guide/upgrede/incompatible.md

@ruanwenjun ruanwenjun added the 3.2.0 for 3.2.0 version label Feb 23, 2023
@ruanwenjun ruanwenjun added this to the 3.2.0 milestone Feb 23, 2023
@ruanwenjun ruanwenjun added the improvement make more easy to user or prompt friendly label Feb 23, 2023

public interface ExecuteFunctionBuilder<Request extends ExecuteRequest, Result extends ExecuteResult> {

CompletableFuture<ExecuteFunction<Request, Result>> createWorkflowInstanceExecuteFunction(ExecuteContext executeContext);

Check notice

Code scanning / CodeQL

Useless parameter

The parameter 'executeContext' is never used.
@ruanwenjun ruanwenjun force-pushed the dev_wenjun_splitCommandCreat branch 3 times, most recently from 95e41a0 to d818147 Compare February 24, 2023 02:08
@codecov-commenter
Copy link

codecov-commenter commented Feb 24, 2023

Codecov Report

Merging #13610 (5976eca) into dev (0db9164) will decrease coverage by 0.17%.
The diff coverage is 23.84%.

❗ Current head 5976eca differs from pull request most recent head e8f8b33. Consider uploading reports for the commit e8f8b33 to get more accurate results

@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##                dev   #13610      +/-   ##
============================================
- Coverage     39.21%   39.04%   -0.17%     
- Complexity     4410     4419       +9     
============================================
  Files          1113     1127      +14     
  Lines         41954    42096     +142     
  Branches       4778     4775       -3     
============================================
- Hits          16451    16437      -14     
- Misses        23672    23844     +172     
+ Partials       1831     1815      -16     
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
...inscheduler/api/controller/ExecutorController.java 17.94% <ø> (-1.04%) ⬇️
...cheduler/api/executor/ExecuteRuntimeException.java 0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
...ilure/recovery/FailureRecoveryExecuteFunction.java 0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
...low/instance/pause/pause/PauseExecuteFunction.java 0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
...instance/pause/recover/RecoverExecuteFunction.java 0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
...w/instance/rerun/RepeatRunningExecuteFunction.java 0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
...or/workflow/instance/stop/StopExecuteFunction.java 0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
...api/service/impl/ProcessDefinitionServiceImpl.java 35.01% <0.00%> (-0.15%) ⬇️
...r/api/service/impl/ProcessInstanceServiceImpl.java 59.92% <0.00%> (-0.48%) ⬇️
...scheduler/api/service/impl/ProjectServiceImpl.java 62.35% <0.00%> (-0.56%) ⬇️
... and 23 more

📣 We’re building smart automated test selection to slash your CI/CD build times. Learn more

@sonarcloud
Copy link

sonarcloud bot commented Feb 24, 2023

SonarCloud Quality Gate failed.    Quality Gate failed

Bug A 0 Bugs
Vulnerability A 0 Vulnerabilities
Security Hotspot A 0 Security Hotspots
Code Smell A 38 Code Smells

22.7% 22.7% Coverage
0.0% 0.0% Duplication

Copy link
Contributor

@caishunfeng caishunfeng left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

some nip


package org.apache.dolphinscheduler.api.executor;

public interface ExecuteRequest {
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Can you add some comment?

@@ -236,6 +236,7 @@ public class ProcessDefinitionServiceImpl extends BaseServiceImpl implements Pro
@Autowired
private TaskDefinitionMapper taskDefinitionMapper;

@Lazy
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Can we avoid using this anno?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

After add dao we can remove the Lazy.

@ruanwenjun ruanwenjun merged commit 4351a25 into apache:dev Feb 24, 2023
@ruanwenjun ruanwenjun deleted the dev_wenjun_splitCommandCreat branch February 24, 2023 05:47
@huanhuande
Copy link

Can you ask which distribution this refactored code is on

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
3.2.0 for 3.2.0 version backend improvement make more easy to user or prompt friendly
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants