ISSUE 1125: Addressing difference in workflow interceptors when using the testkit #1257
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
edmondop
requested review from
Groxx,
shijiesheng,
agautam478,
jakobht,
3vilhamster,
dkrotx,
taylanisikdemir and
demirkayaender
as code owners
agautam478
approved these changes
Jan 29, 2024
|
@agautam478 I think we can close #1125 |
ketsiambaku
added a commit
to ketsiambaku/cadence-client
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 29, 2024
… testkit (uber-go#1257)" This reverts commit e31ba38.
ketsiambaku
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 1, 2024
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
What changed?
As identified by #1125, a bug in the workflow testsuite resulted in a different behavior when running workflows using the real worker (the
ExecuteWorkflowinterceptor would be executed both on parent and children workflow) and the testsuite.Why?
How did you test it?
See unit test
Potential risks