-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 243
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
Worker builds binary in case the binary doesn't match the worker arch #200
Worker builds binary in case the binary doesn't match the worker arch #200
Conversation
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #200 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 62.11% 62.13% +0.01%
==========================================
Files 48 49 +1
Lines 3944 4046 +102
==========================================
+ Hits 2450 2514 +64
- Misses 1086 1117 +31
- Partials 408 415 +7
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
05ceb45
to
f491cca
Compare
@michelvocks So this works, however. On the previous iteration I wasn't saving the pipeline as a new create run. Now I am with create. On the previous iteration this lead to a nice thing where it didn't rebuild the pipeline again once the worker rebuild it for itself. Now it's always rebuilding and I'm not exactly sure why. Probably because I'm always creating a new I also refactored a code a bit. ;) |
This f*cker runs for 44 seconds. |
1029308
to
48ca7f6
Compare
@michelvocks Alright, this is as ready as it gets. I'll add some more coverage later on. Tell me if you like the SHAPair approach. :) |
Buuu
:( I'll try to take a look at this and fix it. It's bat that it can do that. |
return err | ||
|
||
// Make sure buckets exist | ||
setP.update(userBucket) |
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.
@michelvocks Sorry, I had to refactor this in this batch. It was too repetitive. :) Besides, you touch it you own it. :D
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.
😄 good job!
ba5371f
to
e098b75
Compare
TestingVagrant:
Found the record and moved on the run the rebuilt binary.
ALL TESTS PASSED |
…stead of per pipeline.
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.
LGTM ❤️
…mistaken for pipeline.UniqueID
Codecov ReportAttention: Patch coverage is
❗ Your organization needs to install the Codecov GitHub app to enable full functionality. Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #200 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 62.11% 62.13% +0.01%
==========================================
Files 48 49 +1
Lines 3944 4046 +102
==========================================
+ Hits 2450 2514 +64
- Misses 1086 1117 +31
- Partials 408 415 +7 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
@michelvocks Alright! This works, but, as you can see I had to export two of the none exported functions, NewBuild and GitPull. I can't use the Create one directly because that tries to store things in the db to which the worker doesn't have access to.
I'll try to refactor this, I just wanted to share with you the current progress.