Bugfix/picking changes to allow for failover polling #6523
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
davidporter-id-au
requested review from
Shaddoll,
neil-xie,
Groxx,
shijiesheng,
jakobht,
3vilhamster,
sankari165,
dkrotx,
taylanisikdemir and
demirkayaender
as code owners
Shaddoll
reviewed
Nov 26, 2024
Shaddoll
approved these changes
Nov 26, 2024
davidporter-id-au
deleted the
bugfix/picking-changes-to-allow-for-failover-polling
branch
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
What changed?
With thanks to my colleague @Shaddoll for noticing, this ports across a Temporal fix temporalio/temporal#4943 to the cadence server repo.
The problem is that for sync workflows, or workflows using the Execute API in go, the branch token itself is not sufficiently good enough information about the state of history polling. It can change, such as during a failover. This wraps that change in version-history so that it's able to handle this more gracefully.
Why?
To fix a problem for customers during failover
How did you test it?
Potential risks
This is a fairly high risk change in that it could break mutable state polling and there's quite a few pathways in which panics can occur if the version history isn't passed along, so this will need to be merged cautiously.
Release notes
Documentation Changes