feat(models): add service tables #241
Conversation
Codecov ReportAttention: Patch coverage is
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #241 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 72.14% 72.79% +0.64%
==========================================
Files 7 7
Lines 955 985 +30
==========================================
+ Hits 689 717 +28
- Misses 266 268 +2
|
Alputer
force-pushed
the
services-table
branch
from
3d87f1c to
441a391
Compare
Alputer
force-pushed
the
services-table
branch
from
441a391 to
861463a
Compare
| Revision ID: 8da6ccf08af9 | ||
| Revises: 2e82f33ee37d | ||
| Create Date: 2024-11-19 10:51:51.199670 | ||
|
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
todo: Remove empty line in the docstring.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
All other files (except workflow_sharing migration which has the additional rebase_date field) have the same format. Maybe better to follow the same structure? The empty line might be signaling that no rebasing has taken place.
| sa.PrimaryKeyConstraint("service_id", name=op.f("pk_workflow_service")), | ||
| schema="__reana", | ||
| ) | ||
| # ### end Alembic commands ### |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
todo: Remove the "end Alembic" comment.
| """Downgrade to 2e82f33ee37d revision.""" | ||
| op.drop_table("workflow_service", schema="__reana") | ||
| op.drop_table("service", schema="__reana") | ||
| # ### end Alembic commands ### |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
todo: Remove "end Alembic" comment.
| class ServiceType(enum.Enum): | ||
| """Enumeration of service types.""" | ||
|
|
||
| dask = 0 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is this one intended to be general Dask service? I wonder about distinguishing Dask cluster from Dask dashboard, for example in case there would be more services exposed from the Dask integration. But I guess these theoretical distinctions may not be useful as of yet...
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think we can introduce a new service type relatively easily if we need an extra field in the future. Calling the service dask_dashboard or something similar at the moment could be too specific.
reana_db/models.py
Outdated
| id_ = Column(UUIDType, primary_key=True, default=generate_uuid) | ||
| name = Column(String(255)) | ||
| uri = Column(Text) # uri to access the service | ||
| status = Column(Enum(RunStatus), nullable=False, default=RunStatus.created) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
For admin use cases, it may be perhaps good to have some indexes, e.g. on the status column so that we could ask "which users have Dask dashboards still open?". But this is something that we may also get to later.
Alputer
force-pushed
the
services-table
branch
from
861463a to
1521648
Compare
Alputer
force-pushed
the
services-table
branch
from
1521648 to
25cd5e9
Compare
Alputer
force-pushed
the
services-table
branch
from
6b58661 to
6671ce2
Compare
Alputer
force-pushed
the
services-table
branch
from
6671ce2 to
68c344f
Compare
Alputer
force-pushed
the
services-table
branch
from
68c344f to
5092280
Compare
Alputer
force-pushed
the
services-table
branch
from
5092280 to
f0da4c1
Compare
This PR adds
Servicetable to db. Currently, we have onlydaskservice but it is a generic implementation and can be used for other components associated with workflows in the future.