- Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork1k
fix: set prebuilds lifecycle parameters on creation and claim#19252
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
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading.Please reload this page.
Conversation
ec09fd8
todd57747
Comparedd57747
to6415069
CompareUh oh!
There was an error while loading.Please reload this page.
autostart_schedule= $2, | ||
next_start_at= $3 | ||
WHERE | ||
id= $1; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others.Learn more.
suggestion: make it impossible by addingAND owner_id != ...
ssncferreiraAug 8, 2025 • edited
Loading Uh oh!
There was an error while loading.Please reload this page.
edited
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading.Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others.Learn more.
Yeah, I wasn’t sure at first whether to enforce it at the database level or just in the application layer, but I agree it makes more sense to make it impossible by adding a DB-level constraint.
Addressed in4c847c9 and I’ve updated the other relevant queries as well to align with it.
As suggested, the scope of this PR was reduced by splitting the original implementation into smaller, more focused PRs. |
…prebuilt workspaces
…uilds-lifecycle-params
…uilds-lifecycle-params
id= $1 | ||
-- Prebuilt workspaces (identified by having the prebuilds system user as owner_id) | ||
-- are managed by the reconciliation loop, not the lifecycle executor which handles | ||
-- autostart_schedule and next_start_at | ||
AND owner_id!='c42fdf75-3097-471c-8c33-fb52454d81c0'::UUID; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others.Learn more.
This seems more related to#19264?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others.Learn more.
As discussed internally will keep this constraint in this PR as per the PR description:Updated lifecycle-related SQL update queries to explicitly exclude prebuilt workspaces.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading.Please reload this page.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading.Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others.Learn more.
Approving, but would also like input from@SasSwart before merge
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading.Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others.Learn more.
Thanks Susana. Good work!
@johnstcn I've double checked all your feedback here as requested. None of it seemed controversial and I like the way it has been addressed.
8567ecb
intomainUh oh!
There was an error while loading.Please reload this page.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading.Please reload this page.
Description
This PR ensures that prebuilt workspaces are properly excluded from the lifecycle executor and treated as a separate class of workspaces, fully managed by the prebuild reconciliation loop.
It introduces two lifecycle guarantees:
Changes
Relates
Related issue:#18898
To reduce the scope of this PR and make the review process more manageable, the original implementation has been split into the following focused PRs:
These PRs should be considered in conjunction with this one to understand the complete set of lifecycle separation changes for prebuilt workspaces.