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

[PFS-199] Use PFS client rather than pachclient in PPS worker #9707

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Feb 5, 2024

Conversation

brycemcanally
Copy link
Contributor

This PR modifies the PPS worker code to use a PFS client rather than a pachclient. This mostly involved updating the indirectly referenced code to use the internal PFS client utility functions that corresponded with the relevant pachclient methods.

Copy link

codecov bot commented Feb 5, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Comparison is base (07f8e39) 58.83% compared to head (b146ba8) 56.86%.
Report is 4 commits behind head on master.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #9707      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   58.83%   56.86%   -1.97%     
==========================================
  Files         583      583              
  Lines       71193    71198       +5     
==========================================
- Hits        41887    40490    -1397     
- Misses      28682    30213    +1531     
+ Partials      624      495     -129     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

Copy link
Contributor

@FahadBSyed FahadBSyed left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

lgtm

@brycemcanally brycemcanally merged commit 3f2b2bb into master Feb 5, 2024
21 checks passed
@brycemcanally brycemcanally deleted the pps-worker-use-pfs-client branch February 5, 2024 15:08
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