Remove worker hardware utilization code #1400
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or 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
3vilhamster
requested review from
Groxx,
demirkayaender,
dkrotx,
jakobht,
shijiesheng and
taylanisikdemir
as code owners
3vilhamster
force-pushed
the
revert-1260
branch
2 times, most recently
from
4bc7808 to
deaa234
Compare
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files
... and 1 file with indirect coverage changes Continue to review full report in Codecov by Sentry.
|
3vilhamster
force-pushed
the
revert-1260
branch
from
665eb8e to
75c6630
Compare
|
@timl3136 Did we have a change of plans ? wondering why this ended up not being used |
ketsiambaku
approved these changes
Nov 13, 2024
mrombout
pushed a commit
to softsense/cadence-client
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 26, 2025
* Remove worker hardware utilization code
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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?
Reverting #1260 since this code is unused and this logic is not required in the worker code.
Why?
To remove unused code and improve code coverage.
How did you test it?
Unit tests.
Potential risks
In theory, somebody could start using these metrics, but they should not be part of Cadence client responsibilities, and there is better tooling (prom-client) that does it better.