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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Fire skipped events at debug level #9371

Closed
wants to merge 3 commits into from
Closed

Fire skipped events at debug level #9371

wants to merge 3 commits into from

Conversation

scottgigante
Copy link
Contributor

@scottgigante scottgigante commented Jan 13, 2024 •
edited
Loading

resolves #8774

Problem

If fail_fast, dbt prints hundreds of lines "Skipping due to fail_fast", hiding the actual cause of the error deep in bash history (sometimes too deep to read)

Solution

This moves the "Skipping due to fail_fast" to log level DEBUG. An alternative would be to a) drop it altogether or b) aggregate the results together to a "Skipping tasks due to fail_fast". This approach requires the least modification to the task results framework.

Checklist

  • I have read the contributing guide and understand what's expected of me
  • I have run this code in development and it appears to resolve the stated issue
  • Tests are not required/relevant for this PR
  • This PR has no interface changes (e.g. macros, cli, logs, json artifacts, config files, adapter interface, etc) or this PR has already received feedback and approval from Product or DX
  • This PR includes type annotations for new and modified functions

@scottgigante scottgigante requested a review from a team as a code owner January 13, 2024 07:33
@cla-bot cla-bot
Copy link

cla-bot bot commented Jan 13, 2024

Thanks for your pull request, and welcome to our community! We require contributors to sign our Contributor License Agreement and we don't seem to have your signature on file. Check out this article for more information on why we have a CLA.

In order for us to review and merge your code, please submit the Individual Contributor License Agreement form attached above above. If you have questions about the CLA, or if you believe you've received this message in error, please reach out through a comment on this PR.

CLA has not been signed by users: @scottgigante

@github-actions GitHub Actions
Copy link
Contributor

Thank you for your pull request! We could not find a changelog entry for this change. For details on how to document a change, see the contributing guide.

@cla-bot cla-bot bot added the cla:yes label Jan 13, 2024
@graciegoheen graciegoheen added the ready_for_review Externally contributed PR has functional approval, ready for code review from Core engineering label Jan 24, 2024
@scottgigante
Copy link
Contributor Author

Can someone please approve workflows and review this?

@dbeatty10 dbeatty10 added the community This PR is from a community member label Apr 3, 2024
QMalcolm
QMalcolm requested changes Apr 4, 2024
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@QMalcolm QMalcolm left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Apologies for this taking so long! That's on me 😬

These changes look good! I pulled down the branch locally (and resolved the merge conflicts) to run it against a small project and everything looks good 🙂 That said, we need to get two things done

  • Resolve the merge conflicts and get them pushed up
  • Add a test for the functionality, as we wouldn't want this to regress in the future
    • in the test we should
      • assert that Skipping due to fail_fast doesn't appear in the output if --fail-fast is specified but --debug is not
      • assert that Skipping due to fail_fast does appear in the ouput if both --fail-fast and --debug are specified
    • here are some examples of tests that something exists in the run output
    • our test should be in test_fail_fast_run.py

@graciegoheen graciegoheen removed the request for review from MichelleArk April 17, 2024 15:18
@scottgigante scottgigante mentioned this pull request May 29, 2024
Closed
2 tasks
@nevdelap nevdelap mentioned this pull request May 30, 2024
Merged
5 tasks
@graciegoheen
Copy link
Contributor

I'm going to close this in favor of #10244

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@QMalcolm QMalcolm QMalcolm requested changes

Assignees

@QMalcolm QMalcolm

@graciegoheen graciegoheen

Labels
cla:yes community This PR is from a community member ready_for_review Externally contributed PR has functional approval, ready for code review from Core engineering
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

[CT-3185] Hundreds of: Skipping due to fail_fast
4 participants
@scottgigante @graciegoheen @QMalcolm @dbeatty10