Movatterモバイル変換


[0]ホーム

URL:


Skip to content

Navigation Menu

Sign in
Appearance settings

Search code, repositories, users, issues, pull requests...

Provide feedback

We read every piece of feedback, and take your input very seriously.

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Sign up
Appearance settings

Improve AWS service integration support (pattern)#74

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 ourterms of service andprivacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub?Sign in to your account

Closed

Conversation

@FrancisLfg
Copy link
Contributor

@FrancisLfgFrancisLfg commentedAug 9, 2020
edited
Loading

Some AWS service integration are not supported by the sdk, for instance ECS/Fargate with callback pattern :https://docs.aws.amazon.com/step-functions/latest/dg/connect-supported-services.html.

This PR improve service integration and support callback pattern for ECS/Fargate.

2 options has been removed : 'wait_for_callback' and 'wait_for_completion' and a new one has been added : 'integration_pattern'.
As we have 3 choices Request, Sync and Callback boolean option does not suit well this is why this PR adds an enum to manage the service integration pattern. So we now need to pass the wanted pattern as :

step = BatchSubmitJobStep('Batch Job', integration_pattern=IntegrationPattern.RequestResponse)
where integration_pattern can take following values :

  • IntegrationPattern.RequestResponse
  • IntegrationPattern.RunAJob
  • IntegrationPattern.WaitForCallback

I have used documentation terminology. It is a breaking change but IMHO, the 2 options wait_for_* should not be kept.

I also refactored a bit Task class to check if pattern if supported by a given service, and to automatizeField.Resource.value generation.

All unit tests are OK, I am not able to perform integ test right now but it should have no impact.
I am not sure how to test the documentation generation, what should I do to check that documentation is OK ?

Let me know if some part are not clear or if we could do better, I am not sure about the "name" and "action" Task class attribute but it helps simplifyingField.Resource.value value generation and error management, what do you think ?

By submitting this pull request, I confirm that you can use, modify, copy, and redistribute this contribution, under the terms of your choice.

@StepFunctions-Bot
Copy link
Contributor

AWS CodeBuild CI Report

  • CodeBuild project: StepFunctionsPythonSDK-integtests
  • Commit ID:a03b9c3
  • Result: FAILED
  • Build Logs (available for 30 days)

Powered bygithub-codebuild-logs, available on theAWS Serverless Application Repository

@StepFunctions-Bot
Copy link
Contributor

AWS CodeBuild CI Report

Powered bygithub-codebuild-logs, available on theAWS Serverless Application Repository

@StepFunctions-Bot
Copy link
Contributor

AWS CodeBuild CI Report

  • Result: SUCCEEDED
  • Build Logs (available for 30 days)

Powered bygithub-codebuild-logs, available on theAWS Serverless Application Repository

@StepFunctions-Bot
Copy link
Contributor

AWS CodeBuild CI Report

  • CodeBuild project: StepFunctionsPythonSDK-integtests
  • Commit ID:b342696
  • Result: SUCCEEDED
  • Build Logs (available for 30 days)

Powered bygithub-codebuild-logs, available on theAWS Serverless Application Repository

Base automatically changed frommaster tomainFebruary 25, 2021 21:10
@creatorrr
Copy link

Is this planned to be merged soon? PR seems a bit outdated,@FrancisLfg do you need help to update it?

@shivlaks
Copy link
Contributor

Is this planned to be merged soon? PR seems a bit outdated,@FrancisLfg do you need help to update it?

@creatorrr - this PR does seem a little stale, but we are starting to introduce integration patterns as an enum in#125
We will need to resolve the open thread around how we introduce the patterns to existing service integrations.

We cannot just change the properties and drop the flags to introduce the integration pattern enum as itbreaking.
We will need to introduce it as an optional property and mark the flags for deprecation (which we can subsequently flush out when we release v3)

copy@ca-nguyen

creatorrr reacted with thumbs up emoji

Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account?Sign in to comment

Reviewers

No reviews

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants

@FrancisLfg@StepFunctions-Bot@creatorrr@shivlaks

[8]ページ先頭

©2009-2025 Movatter.jp