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

Add 2017-04-11-inmemory-azure-entities-breaks-queue #1

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Apr 12, 2017

Conversation

imbstack
Copy link
Contributor

Just making this PR as an example for an rfc I'm about to write, but feel free to comment on it regardless!

@djmitche
Copy link
Contributor

It seems like the root here is deploying a change that requires a config update, and forgetting to do that config update. Catching that in tests is good, but not always possible.

I'm not sure of an automated way to catch that -- basically someone has to observe, "this will require a config change", and then find a way to prevent deployment before that config change has been made. Maybe the easiest is, just make the config change right away?

@imbstack
Copy link
Contributor Author

This wasn't actually missing config as you saw in taskcluster/taskcluster-queue/#163 after you wrote this note initially :p

Does that change your thoughts on it at all? Perhaps the action item that we did yesterday to make inMemory yell if you don't even pass in this key is enough?

@djmitche
Copy link
Contributor

Yeah, I definitely mis-interpreted that. I think the inMemory change fixes the narrow cause of the issue, and that setting up a staging environment and test is the most comprehensive way to address the broader cause (issues in deployment not caught by testing). Both are already on the action-items list :)

@imbstack imbstack merged commit bc595d5 into master Apr 12, 2017
@imbstack imbstack deleted the 2017-04-11-inmemory-azure-entities-breaks-queue branch April 12, 2017 18:40
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants