Closed chuck-dbos closed 1 month ago
Looks good! My only concern is the table name change migration. Agree the new name is better, but I'm worried it's a breaking change that could cause trouble for existing apps and be a big pain for no real user-facing gain.
How would it break existing apps?
Looks good! My only concern is the table name change migration. Agree the new name is better, but I'm worried it's a breaking change that could cause trouble for existing apps and be a big pain for no real user-facing gain.
How would it break existing apps?
The main issue is if old code and new code run simultaneously, which is possible in the presence of long-lived workflows.
The main issue is if old code and new code run simultaneously, which is possible in the presence of long-lived workflows.
And we think we have that in python now?
The main issue is if old code and new code run simultaneously, which is possible in the presence of long-lived workflows.
And we think we have that in python now?
We have a demo app using this -- the reminder app can sleep many days.
I have the same concern of the non-backward compatible change.
It can't just be old w/ long WFs, it has to also use queued long WFs.
I can put an updatable view in under the old name for a while if you insist.
Add queue name to WF status + test Get rid of word "job" by renaming system table Add a test inspired by customer case