Flink Unique Job Names#156
Conversation
for more information, see https://pre-commit.ci
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #156 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 95.53% 95.60% +0.06%
==========================================
Files 14 14
Lines 493 500 +7
==========================================
+ Hits 471 478 +7
Misses 22 22 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
ranchodeluxe
added
the
test-flink
moradology
left a comment
moradology
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Looks good. One minor consideration but honestly, it is good to go as is
| """ | ||
| if self.bakery_class == FlinkOperatorBakery: | ||
| unique_suffix = "".join( | ||
| secrets.choice(string.ascii_letters + string.digits) for _ in range(5) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Not sure that it matters, but I like random for this kind of thing so that a seed can be used for predictable outputs
|
|
||
| return job_name | ||
|
|
||
| def add_unique_suffix_to_flink_jobs(self, per_recipe_unique_job_name): |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
In another PR, we should probably go through and figure out which behaviors we can expect runner implementations to sort out so that Bake can be thin and runner independent. It'd be great for it to not know anything at all about implementation details
2 participants
Addresses #132