Skip to content
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.

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

Record linearization in database #2213

Merged
merged 2 commits into from Mar 27, 2017

Conversation

arjclark
Copy link
Contributor

@arjclark arjclark commented Mar 22, 2017

Closes #2075

Adds a table recording task linearization to the suite database.

@arjclark arjclark added this to the next release milestone Mar 22, 2017
@hjoliver
Copy link
Member

Much as I dislike creating more issues (we almost got down to 100 for a while...) when #2075 is closed by this PR, we should probably record the first bullet point of #2075 (comment) in a new one?

sqlite3 "${DB_FILE}" 'SELECT namespace, linearization FROM linearization ORDER BY namespace' \
>"${NAME}"
cmp_ok "${TEST_SOURCE_DIR}/${TEST_NAME_BASE}/${NAME}" "${NAME}"

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Maybe rebase this branch to master and protect the sqlite3 call as documented here: https://github.com/cylc/cylc/blob/master/bin/cylc-test-battery#L77 (else we might forget...)

@hjoliver
Copy link
Member

hjoliver commented Mar 23, 2017

Also wondering if inheritance or families might be a better name for the new table? (linearization is pretty obscure, for those not in the know).

@hjoliver hjoliver modified the milestones: soon, next release Mar 23, 2017
@arjclark
Copy link
Contributor Author

@hjoliver - rebased and changed to "inheritance" from "linearization"

@arjclark
Copy link
Contributor Author

we should probably record the first bullet point of #2075 (comment) in a new one

Yeah, that'd probably be for the best.

@matthewrmshin
Copy link
Contributor

On reload, I wonder if it will be safer to delete everything and re-insert them all again.

@hjoliver
Copy link
Member

hjoliver commented Mar 23, 2017

@arjclark -

we should probably record the first bullet point of #2075 (comment) in a new one

Yeah, that'd probably be for the best.

Just noted in #1984 that shared dependency objects might ultimately be the best route to making family information available to external tools (I haven't thought this through in detail though...)

@hjoliver
Copy link
Member

I haven't thought this through in detail though

(huh, three different pronunciations of "ough" in one sentence 😬)

@arjclark
Copy link
Contributor Author

On reload, I wonder if it will be safer to delete everything and re-insert them all again.

So, I'm in two minds about this which is why I ended up going with "INSERT or REPLACE" as I didn't want to lose details for tasks that had run previously but were no longer in the suite.

@hjoliver - thoughts?

Copy link
Contributor

@matthewrmshin matthewrmshin left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Logic OK. If we are happy with reload, then we are OK.

@hjoliver
Copy link
Member

As I recall we can't change inheritance structure on reload, so I don't think reinsert is needed (or has that changed?)

@matthewrmshin
Copy link
Contributor

As I recall we can't change inheritance structure on reload, so I don't think reinsert is needed (or has that changed?)

In which case, good to go.

@matthewrmshin matthewrmshin merged commit 9293bed into cylc:master Mar 27, 2017
@arjclark arjclark deleted the 2075.linearisation branch March 27, 2017 10:58
matthewrmshin added a commit to matthewrmshin/cylc-flow that referenced this pull request Mar 28, 2017
matthewrmshin added a commit to matthewrmshin/cylc-flow that referenced this pull request Mar 29, 2017
matthewrmshin added a commit to matthewrmshin/cylc-flow that referenced this pull request Mar 29, 2017
matthewrmshin added a commit to matthewrmshin/cylc-flow that referenced this pull request Apr 5, 2017
matthewrmshin added a commit to matthewrmshin/cylc-flow that referenced this pull request Apr 6, 2017
matthewrmshin added a commit to matthewrmshin/cylc-flow that referenced this pull request Apr 10, 2017
matthewrmshin added a commit to matthewrmshin/cylc-flow that referenced this pull request Apr 19, 2017
matthewrmshin added a commit to matthewrmshin/cylc-flow that referenced this pull request Apr 24, 2017
matthewrmshin added a commit to matthewrmshin/cylc-flow that referenced this pull request May 4, 2017
matthewrmshin added a commit to matthewrmshin/cylc-flow that referenced this pull request May 5, 2017
matthewrmshin added a commit to matthewrmshin/cylc-flow that referenced this pull request May 8, 2017
matthewrmshin added a commit to matthewrmshin/cylc-flow that referenced this pull request May 9, 2017
matthewrmshin added a commit to matthewrmshin/cylc-flow that referenced this pull request May 10, 2017
matthewrmshin added a commit to matthewrmshin/cylc-flow that referenced this pull request May 11, 2017
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

3 participants