-
Hi there, I just tried the new shipped concurrency feature (thanks for that!) and with the following workflow in a private repo:
Then I did two pushes, both triggered the workflow but the second one didn’t cancel the first, instead it was pending and waiting for the first one to finish. Thanks! |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
Replies: 6 comments
-
The first link is about the
It sounds like it should cancel pending as well as running workflows with the same group. If it doesn’t work then that might be a bug (remember that the feature is in beta). |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
So far I was only able to get it to work when using |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
There’s a remark about
I wonder if this is related to your issue. Does it mean that a later queued job or workflow run may get canceled instead of the earlier queued one? But in your case neither is canceled… |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
@ocean90 I was very eager to utilize this feature when I saw the announcement, but I have had the same experience as you. I inferred from the documentation that I am using
|
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
Simran-B:
This should only apply if you use the key on the job level which I didn’t when I reported the issue. I wasn’t able to trigger this issue now with using Another bug was mentioned in Actions concurrency bug report but I’m not sure if they are related, maybe @yaananth can answer that? |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
@yaananth gave an update in Actions concurrency bug report - #4 by yaananth for a related issue and so I tried the |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
@yaananth gave an update in Actions concurrency bug report - #4 by yaananth for a related issue and so I tried the
concurrency
key on the workflow level again and it’s now working too!