Skip to content
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 our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Modernize expired dids to use prom pusher #143

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

voetberg
Copy link
Contributor

@voetberg voetberg commented Aug 2, 2024

I'm redoing all of PR #132 with the updated sqla guidelines

common/check_expired_dids Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
common/check_expired_dids Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
common/check_expired_dids Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
common/check_expired_dids Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
common/check_expired_dids Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
common/check_expired_dids Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
common/check_expired_dids Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
common/check_expired_dids Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
common/check_expired_dids Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Copy link
Contributor

@dchristidis dchristidis left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Please also address these:

check_expired_dids:43:60: W291 trailing whitespace
check_expired_dids:49:1: W293 blank line contains whitespace

Then I would either merge into a single commit or split based on objective (from what I can see: Python 2 compatibility, header, SQLAlchemy, Prometheus, except statement). Just make sure to prefix all commit subjects with Common: .

Copy link
Contributor

@dchristidis dchristidis left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The content is perfect. Well done.

But I’m afraid I must pester you one last time about the commit message. It’s not considered a good practise to have overly-long subjects. Keep it short and elaborate in the body.

* Update to sqla2.0
* push with PrometheusPusher
* sort imports
* add header
* change except statement to except Exception
dchristidis
dchristidis previously approved these changes Aug 7, 2024
Copy link
Contributor

@dchristidis dchristidis left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks good, thanks for bearing with me.

Following the contribution guide, I need approval from @ericvaandering before I can merge.

@voetberg
Copy link
Contributor Author

voetberg commented Aug 7, 2024

Looks good, thanks for bearing with me.

Following the contribution guide, I need approval from @/ericvaandering before I can merge.

Eric is on vacation until next week so we'll have to wait. I already talked with him about this anyways so I assume it'll just be a formality.


with PrometheusPusher() as manager:
(manager.gauge(
"expired_dids.total",
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Requires further review.

Copy link
Contributor

@ericvaandering ericvaandering Aug 14, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

What is the "requires further review?"

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Same as the other two PRs: (1) it silently changes the metric name to (2) one that is arguably inferior.

@dchristidis dchristidis dismissed their stale review August 7, 2024 15:44

Uncommunicated metric rename

@ericvaandering
Copy link
Contributor

Looks good, thanks for bearing with me.
Following the contribution guide, I need approval from @/ericvaandering before I can merge.

Eric is on vacation until next week so we'll have to wait. I already talked with him about this anyways so I assume it'll just be a formality.

I assume the content-wise this is the exact same as #132 except for possibly some different SQLAlchemy grammar?

@voetberg
Copy link
Contributor Author

Looks good, thanks for bearing with me.
Following the contribution guide, I need approval from @/ericvaandering before I can merge.

Eric is on vacation until next week so we'll have to wait. I already talked with him about this anyways so I assume it'll just be a formality.

I assume the content-wise this is the exact same as #132 except for possibly some different SQLAlchemy grammar?

Yeah it's completely identical besides for the sql2.0 and some minor formatting/spacing/indenting

@voetberg voetberg self-assigned this Aug 20, 2024
@ericvaandering
Copy link
Contributor

I approve. Can be merged.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants