feat(api/database)!: store deployment record in database for Vela-targeted deployments #1031
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
Codecov ReportAttention:
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #1031 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 67.79% 66.96% -0.84%
==========================================
Files 318 330 +12
Lines 13754 14074 +320
==========================================
+ Hits 9325 9424 +99
- Misses 3956 4169 +213
- Partials 473 481 +8
|
![github-actions[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/15368?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
| @@ -0,0 +1,33 @@ | |||
| // SPDX-License-Identifier: Apache-2.0 | |||
|
|
|||
| package deployment | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🚫 [golangci] reported by reviewdog 🐶
3-33 lines are duplicate of database/deployment/update.go:5-35 (dupl)
| // | ||
| // Use of this source code is governed by the LICENSE file in this repository. | ||
|
|
||
| package deployment |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🚫 [golangci] reported by reviewdog 🐶
5-35 lines are duplicate of database/deployment/create.go:3-33 (dupl)
plyr4
reviewed
Dec 28, 2023
ecrupper
requested changes
Dec 28, 2023
| } else { | ||
| d.SetBuilds(builds) | ||
| _, err := database.FromContext(c).UpdateDeployment(d) | ||
| if err != nil { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Should an error like this stop the build? Probably? Not sure though, so noting it.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
im not too sure what to do for this?
added 2 commits
December 28, 2023 12:39
wass3rw3rk
reviewed
Dec 29, 2023
wass3rw3rk
previously approved these changes
Dec 29, 2023
plyr4
previously approved these changes
Dec 29, 2023
ecrupper
approved these changes
Dec 29, 2023
| dWithBs := []*library.Deployment{} | ||
|
|
||
| for _, deployment := range d { | ||
| b, _, err := database.FromContext(c).ListBuildsForDeployment(ctx, deployment, nil, 1, 3) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Can we delete the database function ListBuildsForDeployment? Can be a follow up PR but would be nice to remove any dead code.
ecrupper
previously approved these changes
Dec 29, 2023
wass3rw3rk
previously approved these changes
Dec 29, 2023
claire1618
dismissed stale reviews from wass3rw3rk, ecrupper, and plyr4
via
16fc94c
ecrupper
previously approved these changes
Dec 29, 2023
wass3rw3rk
approved these changes
Dec 29, 2023
timhuynh94
approved these changes
Dec 29, 2023
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.
When a repo has a lot of deployments historically, viewing them in the UI is cumbersome and slow.
The loading of deployments on the deployments tab in Vela takes a few more seconds to load than the other pages (schedules, secrets, audits...) even when there are no deployments for a repo. This is due to the way deployments are stored and retrieved.
The changes made in this pull request add a new database table so that we can store deployment information instead of having to go to the scm to retrieve them.
With these changes, any new deployments will be added to our database and pulled from there when requested, but old deployments are still pulled from GitHub.