This repository has been archived by the owner on Dec 13, 2023. It is now read-only.
Lazy evaluate workflow only in case of task is successful. #3655
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
manan164
changed the title
1 task
6 tasks
v1r3n
approved these changes
Jun 21, 2023
Sign up for free
to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Pull Request type
NOTE: Please remember to run
./gradlew spotlessApplyto fix any format violations.Changes in this PR
When the task is updated we have put a performance improvement where we lazy evaluate the workflow state. This change was introduced in #3146 . Now when one of the forked tasks fails we should evaluate the workflow state immediately since the task can have a retry which is not exhausted.
Describe the new behavior from this PR, and why it's needed
Issue #
Lazily evaluate workflow only in case the task is successful.
Alternatives considered
Describe alternative implementation you have considered
Alternative #3640 was raised