Skip to content

Add Fairness Keys/Weights #2012

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

Merged
merged 10 commits into from
Aug 19, 2025
Merged

Add Fairness Keys/Weights #2012

merged 10 commits into from
Aug 19, 2025

Conversation

Sushisource
Copy link
Member

Warning

DRAFT until we have a CLI RC with this in it that can be used for tests

What was changed

Added fairness keys/weights to priority

Why?

New feature

Checklist

  1. Closes

  2. How was this tested:
    Added test

  3. Any docs updates needed?

@Sushisource Sushisource marked this pull request as ready for review August 18, 2025 19:22
@Sushisource Sushisource requested a review from a team as a code owner August 18, 2025 19:22
@@ -832,8 +832,9 @@ func (ts *WorkerVersioningTestSuite) TestTaskQueueStats() {
ts.NoError(err)
ts.Equal(1, len(taskQueueInfo.VersionsInfo))

ts.validateTaskQueueStats(expectedWorkflowStats, taskQueueInfo.VersionsInfo[""].TypesInfo[client.TaskQueueTypeWorkflow].Stats)
ts.validateTaskQueueStats(expectedActivityStats, taskQueueInfo.VersionsInfo[""].TypesInfo[client.TaskQueueTypeActivity].Stats)
// TODO: Fix to work with newer response format
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Are you going to address this in this PR

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

No, I think it needs a more comprehensive change and I don't want to combine them together. I'll make an item for it though and reference it.

Copy link
Contributor

@yuandrew yuandrew left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM once the thing Quinn mentioned gets added

if result.FairnessKey != "fair-activity" {
return 0, fmt.Errorf("activity did not return expected fairness key %s != %s", "fair-activity", result.FairnessKey)
}
if result.FairnessWeight != 4.20 {
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Is the extra 0 here needed for correctness? I see the test below doesn't have an extra 0 in the decimal,

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

No, it's pointless. I just wrote it that way lol

@Sushisource Sushisource enabled auto-merge (squash) August 19, 2025 22:29
@Sushisource Sushisource merged commit 9ca81c6 into master Aug 19, 2025
38 of 43 checks passed
@Sushisource Sushisource deleted the fairness branch August 19, 2025 23:47
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.

3 participants