add more process/job links + add batch job dismiss operation #346
Conversation
fmigneault
added
triage/conformance
github-actions
bot
added
ci/doc
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #346 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 77.77% 77.89% +0.11%
==========================================
Files 63 63
Lines 9989 10119 +130
Branches 1511 1531 +20
==========================================
+ Hits 7769 7882 +113
- Misses 1734 1748 +14
- Partials 486 489 +3
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
| # PyWPS uses: [Accepted, Started, Succeeded, Failed, Paused, Exception] | ||
| # OWSLib users: [Accepted, Running, Succeeded, Failed, Paused] (with 'Process' in front) | ||
| # OGC compliant (old): [Accepted, Running, Succeeded, Failed] | ||
| # OGC compliant (new): [accepted, running, successful, failed, dismissed] |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It's sad that they do not version the revision. It would be great to know temporaly to which version we are compliant.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
OGC is still technically in v1.0-draft6 (since a few months already).
This should become the official v1.0 eventually (not sure what is the holdup).
The "old" in this case is ~ testbed-14/15.
The "new" is was is reported since, but I have seen instances using both variations of succeeded and successful.
Personally, I which they switched to succeeded to be consistent with all other <state>ed naming, but I'm sure we will have to live with it.
It will be a lot of fixes to switch to successful.
All local, remote and E2E tests use succeeded at the moment.
| @@ -287,26 +373,33 @@ def get_job_status(request): | |||
| return HTTPOk(json=job_status) | |||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
| def cancel_job_task(job, container): | |||
| # type: (Job, AnySettingsContainer) -> Job | |||
| app.control.revoke(job.task_id, terminate=True) # signal to stop celery task. Up to it to terminate remote if any. | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Does EMS propagate the cancel signal to the underlying ADES job?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
No it doesn't for the moment. That is a good point.
This is one more item that should be addressed once a valid (more recent) Workflow is available from what @f-PLT was working on.
updatetime to better track 'latest' job milestones(avoid checking many fields depending on status)