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

Created a seperate listWithRing for services that has a hashring #6350

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Oct 10, 2024

Conversation

jakobht
Copy link
Member

@jakobht jakobht commented Oct 10, 2024

What changed?
Created a seperate list of services that has a hashring.
Use the new list in places where we assume services has a hashring

Why?
We assumed in a few places that all services has a hash ring. Shard manager does not have a hash ring, and we do not want to create one.

How did you test it?
Unit tests, and local manual testing

Potential risks

Release notes

Documentation Changes

Copy link

codecov bot commented Oct 10, 2024

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 50.00000% with 1 line in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 73.72%. Comparing base (5915fed) to head (2bd93e3).
Report is 1 commits behind head on master.

Files with missing lines Patch % Lines
common/membership/resolver.go 0.00% 1 Missing ⚠️
Additional details and impacted files
Files with missing lines Coverage Δ
common/service/name.go 100.00% <ø> (ø)
service/frontend/admin/handler.go 83.19% <100.00%> (ø)
common/membership/resolver.go 80.72% <0.00%> (+4.58%) ⬆️

... and 7 files with indirect coverage changes


Continue to review full report in Codecov by Sentry.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 5915fed...2bd93e3. Read the comment docs.

@jakobht jakobht merged commit 4b9223d into cadence-workflow:master Oct 10, 2024
20 of 22 checks passed
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.

3 participants