Skip to content

fix: extract out worker_pool logic #819

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
Open
wants to merge 24 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Open

fix: extract out worker_pool logic #819

wants to merge 24 commits into from
+404 −125

Conversation

@iamar7
Copy link
Member

@iamar7 iamar7 commented Oct 15, 2025 •
edited
Loading

Description

Issue: https://github.ibm.com/GoldenEye/issues/issues/16090

Release required?

  • No release
  • Patch release (x.x.X)
  • Minor release (x.X.x)
  • Major release (X.x.x)
Release notes content

Run the pipeline

If the CI pipeline doesn't run when you create the PR, the PR requires a user with GitHub collaborators access to run the pipeline.

Run the CI pipeline when the PR is ready for review and you expect tests to pass. Add a comment to the PR with the following text:

/run pipeline

Checklist for reviewers

  • If relevant, a test for the change is included or updated with this PR.
  • If relevant, documentation for the change is included or updated with this PR.

For mergers

  • Use a conventional commit message to set the release level. Follow the guidelines.
  • Include information that users need to know about the PR in the commit message. The commit message becomes part of the GitHub release notes.
  • Use the Squash and merge option.

@iamar7
Copy link
Member Author

iamar7 commented Oct 15, 2025

/run pipeline

@iamar7
Copy link
Member Author

iamar7 commented Oct 16, 2025

/run pipeline

@iamar7
Copy link
Member Author

iamar7 commented Oct 17, 2025

/run pipeline

@iamar7 iamar7 marked this pull request as ready for review October 17, 2025 14:04
@iamar7 iamar7 self-assigned this Oct 17, 2025
toddgiguere
toddgiguere previously approved these changes Oct 17, 2025
View reviewed changes
@toddgiguere
Copy link
Member

Changes look good, but while we are making changes there is an incorrect ImplicitDestroy address in one the tests, can we fix this in the PR?

TestRunCustomsgExample 2025-10-17T14:59:25Z tests.go:157: ╷
│ Error: Invalid target address
│ 
│ No matching objects found. To view the available instances, use "terraform
│ state list". Please modify the address to reference a specific instance.

@iamar7
Copy link
Member Author

iamar7 commented Oct 21, 2025

/run pipeline

@iamar7
Copy link
Member Author

iamar7 commented Oct 21, 2025

/run pipeline

@iamar7
Copy link
Member Author

iamar7 commented Oct 21, 2025

/run pipeline

toddgiguere
toddgiguere previously approved these changes Oct 21, 2025
View reviewed changes
@iamar7
Copy link
Member Author

iamar7 commented Oct 22, 2025

/run pipeline

@iamar7
Copy link
Member Author

iamar7 commented Oct 24, 2025

/run pipeline

Aashiq-J
Aashiq-J reviewed Oct 24, 2025
View reviewed changes
tests/pr_test.go Outdated
assert.NotNil(t, output, "Expected some output")
}

func TestRunWorkerPoolExample(t *testing.T) {
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@ocofaigh @toddgiguere

Should we have this test run in the PR test?
There are already too many tests in PR test, we can move this to other_test

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

why do we even need a separate example for this? We will already test the submodule in other examples because the main module calls it. I would omit the example all together. The new submodule has a usage in the readme, that should be enough

Copy link
Member Author

@iamar7 iamar7 Oct 24, 2025 •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@ocofaigh I have created the example since it was a requirement which came from @joyce and @sbhuiya and subsequently @vkuma17 is working on the DA but it will not be available in TIM.

@iamar7
Copy link
Member Author

iamar7 commented Oct 24, 2025

/run pipeline

1 similar comment
@iamar7
Copy link
Member Author

iamar7 commented Oct 24, 2025

/run pipeline

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

Reviewers

@ocofaigh ocofaigh ocofaigh left review comments

@Aashiq-J Aashiq-J Aashiq-J left review comments

@toddgiguere toddgiguere toddgiguere left review comments

At least 1 approving review is required to merge this pull request.

Assignees

@iamar7 iamar7

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants

@iamar7 @toddgiguere @ocofaigh @Aashiq-J