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

[UI] Scheduled workflow catchup=false option #3131

Merged
merged 7 commits into from
Feb 21, 2020

Conversation

Bobgy
Copy link
Contributor

@Bobgy Bobgy commented Feb 20, 2020

Demo: https://youtu.be/33ZoXJHq3jA
/area frontend
Part of #3055

Verification

The feature works e2e:
All the four recurring runs have past start date and end date of from 10:00am to 10:02am and interval of 1 minute. Those with catchup = false has only one run, those with catchup = true has two runs.
tgYrrS87FuP

Recurring run details page also shows catchup field.
uBAeUo9Tee7

/assign @jingzhang36


This change is Reviewable

@Bobgy
Copy link
Contributor Author

Bobgy commented Feb 21, 2020

/approve

onChange?: (config: {
trigger?: ApiTrigger;
maxConcurrentRuns?: string;
catchup: boolean;
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

It seems that in BE, we use nocatchup and in FE we use catchup. They are having opposite values. Should we just use the same in BE and FE to avoid accidental mistake, e.g., like forgetting to take negation when transferring value...

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

A nit comment above. Otherwise /lgtm

Copy link
Contributor Author

@Bobgy Bobgy Feb 21, 2020

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

That's a good point.
The only reason backend uses no catchup is to be backward compatible, because we need false as the default value.

But for UI, I think it's better we use catchup to avoid unnecessary concept coersion, what do you think?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Sounds reasonable.

@jingzhang36
Copy link
Contributor

/lgtm
/approve

@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: Bobgy, jingzhang36

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

The pull request process is described here

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot merged commit 6c0dcc6 into kubeflow:master Feb 21, 2020
@Bobgy Bobgy deleted the fe_swf_catchup branch February 21, 2020 05:10
Jeffwan pushed a commit to Jeffwan/pipelines that referenced this pull request Dec 9, 2020
* Update codegen instruction

* Regenerate api

* [UI] scheduled workflow catchup option

* Show catchup in recurring run details page

* Add help button to introduce swf catchup=false

* Update snapshots and fix tests
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants