⚗️ Reject saving project while pipeline is running

[pcrespov]

What do these changes do?

Changes in node inputs (e.g. changing links or values) are not allowed to be saved while the pipelines are running.

NOTE: This PR complements the front-end PR #2795 that will gray out the workbench while pipelines run

Details

This is a temporary measure that we adopt in order to avoid an unstable state that occurs when a study is running a pipeline and the links between (newly added) nodes do not work anymore. In addition, this scenario has recently appeared more frequently due to other problems with the scheduler that would leave pipelines running forever.

The underline problem requires some more detail analysis of the underline nodeports library that could take a bit longer to fulfill. When that happens this limitation will be removed.

We agreed that the webserver will respond with 409: The request could not be completed due to a conflict with the current state of the target resource (i.e. pipeline is running). This code is used in situations where the user might be able to resolve the conflict and resubmit the request (front-end will show a pop-up with message below).

@odeimaiz you can instead use the message in the error response

{
  "data": null,
  "error": {
    "errors": [
      {
        "code": "HTTPConflict",
        "message": "Project cannot be modified while pipeline is still running.",
        "resource": null,
        "field": null
      }
    ],
    "status": 409,
    "message": "Project cannot be modified while pipeline is still running."
  }
}

Related issue/s

• Lock links when pipeline is running: frontend #2795

How to test

Checklist

• Openapi changes? make openapi-specs, git commit ... and then make version-*)
• Database migration script? cd packages/postgres-database, make setup-commit, sc-pg review -m "my changes"
• Unit tests for the changes exist
• Runs in the swarm
• Documentation reflects the changes
• New module? Add your github username to .github/CODEOWNERS

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #2797 (0602014) into master (10b14ad) will decrease coverage by 0.0%.
The diff coverage is 61.4%.

@@           Coverage Diff            @@
##           master   #2797     +/-   ##
========================================
- Coverage    78.8%   78.8%   -0.1%     
========================================
  Files         670     670             
  Lines       27200   27230     +30     
  Branches     2669    2677      +8     
========================================
+ Hits        21458   21475     +17     
- Misses       4985    4999     +14     
+ Partials      757     756      -1     

Flag	Coverage Δ
integrationtests	65.8% <55.7%> (-0.1%)	⬇️
unittests	74.3% <31.5%> (-0.1%)	⬇️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
...r/src/simcore_service_webserver/director_v2_api.py	100.0% <ø> (ø)
...re_service_webserver/projects/projects_handlers.py	81.1% <0.0%> (-1.0%)	⬇️
...mcore_service_webserver/projects/projects_utils.py	72.5% <17.6%> (-8.0%)	⬇️
...odels-library/src/models_library/projects_state.py	98.3% <50.0%> (-1.7%)	⬇️
...ore_service_director_v2/api/routes/computations.py	80.1% <80.0%> (-0.2%)	⬇️
...ages/models-library/src/models_library/projects.py	95.4% <100.0%> (ø)
...rc/simcore_service_director_v2/core/application.py	87.7% <100.0%> (+0.6%)	⬆️
...e_service_director_v2/models/schemas/comp_tasks.py	100.0% <100.0%> (ø)
.../simcore_service_director_v2/utils/computations.py	85.7% <100.0%> (ø)
.../src/simcore_service_webserver/director_v2_core.py	66.8% <100.0%> (+1.1%)	⬆️
... and 5 more

[GitHK]

looking good.

[GitHK]

Maybe this should be provided by some utility function in nodeports and have some tests which makes sure the list is up to date. But it will still not be prefect.

[pcrespov]

the tests are fine but I would rather have something closer to that line ... I added some assertions next to t but the check is for the moment limited.