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

[EventHubs] update vendor storage blob code #16559

Merged
merged 6 commits into from
Feb 11, 2021

Conversation

yunhaoling
Copy link
Contributor

@yunhaoling yunhaoling commented Feb 5, 2021

trying to resolve issues: #16192
use the storage-blob version v12.7.1: https://github.com/Azure/azure-sdk-for-python/tree/azure-storage-blob_12.7.1, commit id: e8edeb8

@ghost ghost added the Event Hubs label Feb 5, 2021
@yunhaoling
Copy link
Contributor Author

/azp run python - eventhub - tests

@azure-pipelines
Copy link

Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s).

@yunhaoling yunhaoling force-pushed the yuling/eh/checkpointstoreissue branch from 5ee520f to d646191 Compare February 8, 2021 04:05
@yunhaoling
Copy link
Contributor Author

/azp run python - eventhub - tests

@azure-pipelines
Copy link

Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s).

@check-enforcer
Copy link

check-enforcer bot commented Feb 8, 2021

This pull request is protected by Check Enforcer.

What is Check Enforcer?

Check Enforcer helps ensure all pull requests are covered by at least one check-run (typically an Azure Pipeline). When all check-runs associated with this pull request pass then Check Enforcer itself will pass.

Why am I getting this message?

You are getting this message because Check Enforcer did not detect any check-runs being associated with this pull request within five minutes. This may indicate that your pull request is not covered by any pipelines and so Check Enforcer is correctly blocking the pull request being merged.

What should I do now?

If the check-enforcer check-run is not passing and all other check-runs associated with this PR are passing (excluding license-cla) then you could try telling Check Enforcer to evaluate your pull request again. You can do this by adding a comment to this pull request as follows:
/check-enforcer evaluate
Typically evaulation only takes a few seconds. If you know that your pull request is not covered by a pipeline and this is expected you can override Check Enforcer using the following command:
/check-enforcer override
Note that using the override command triggers alerts so that follow-up investigations can occur (PRs still need to be approved as normal).

What if I am onboarding a new service?

Often, new services do not have validation pipelines associated with them, in order to bootstrap pipelines for a new service, you can issue the following command as a pull request comment:
/azp run prepare-pipelines
This will run a pipeline that analyzes the source tree and creates the pipelines necessary to build and validate your pull request. Once the pipeline has been created you can trigger the pipeline using the following comment:
/azp run python - [service] - ci

@yunhaoling
Copy link
Contributor Author

/azp run python - eventhub - tests

@azure-pipelines
Copy link

Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s).

@yunhaoling yunhaoling marked this pull request as ready for review February 8, 2021 12:20
Copy link
Member

@swathipil swathipil left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

lgtm

**kwargs)
except StorageErrorException as error:
except HttpResponseError as error:
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Given that there's been some updates to error handling - do any of out live tests deal with errors raised from Storage? It shouldn't be an issue, but would be nice to know we have coverage :)

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

nope, we don't have tests covering storage errors as for most blob storage errors, our sdk simply bubble up or ignore them.

The only errors we care about are ResourceModifiedError, ResourceExistsError which are treated as OwnershipLostError:

except (ResourceModifiedError, ResourceExistsError):
logger.info(
"EventProcessor instance %r of namespace %r eventhub %r consumer group %r "
"lost ownership to partition %r",
owner_id,
fully_qualified_namespace,
eventhub_name,
consumer_group,
partition_id,
)
raise OwnershipLostError()

I don't think we need to cover all of the blob storage errors now based on our current "bubble up or ignore" approach. but I'm always open to adding new tests if needed :P

Copy link
Member

@annatisch annatisch left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

A couple of questions but generally looks good to me.

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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants