- 
                Notifications
    You must be signed in to change notification settings 
- Fork 140
Honor all non-completion commands #569
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
      
      
            dandavison
  merged 6 commits into
  main
from
sdk-528-let-coroutines-complete-before-setting-completion
  
      
      
   
  Aug 5, 2024 
      
    
  
     Merged
                    Changes from all commits
      Commits
    
    
            Show all changes
          
          
            6 commits
          
        
        Select commit
          Hold shift + click to select a range
      
      bd7930c
              
                Honor commands generated after the first completion command
              
              
                dandavison 64ece8e
              
                Add type annotation needed by mypy
              
              
                dandavison 42d66db
              
                Update core
              
              
                dandavison ab55ee6
              
                Add test that timer can be started after workflow completion
              
              
                dandavison 8c5e9c3
              
                Skip update tests under Java server
              
              
                dandavison 7a847d5
              
                Test replay backwards compatibility
              
              
                dandavison File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
          Failed to load comments.   
        
        
          
      Loading
        
  Jump to
        
          Jump to file
        
      
      
          Failed to load files.   
        
        
          
      Loading
        
  Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
Some generated files are not rendered by default. Learn more about how customized files appear on GitHub.
      
      Oops, something went wrong.
      
    
  
  
  Submodule sdk-core
    updated
      
        17 files
      
      
          
    | +1 −1 | Cargo.toml | |
| +42 −15 | client/src/lib.rs | |
| +10 −6 | client/src/raw.rs | |
| +4 −3 | core/Cargo.toml | |
| +3 −3 | core/src/abstractions.rs | |
| +1 −1 | core/src/core_tests/determinism.rs | |
| +87 −21 | core/src/core_tests/workflow_tasks.rs | |
| +17 −7 | core/src/internal_flags.rs | |
| +1 −10 | core/src/pollers/poll_buffer.rs | |
| +3 −3 | core/src/test_help/mod.rs | |
| +1 −4 | core/src/worker/activities/local_activities.rs | |
| +1 −4 | core/src/worker/mod.rs | |
| +7 −1 | core/src/worker/workflow/machines/workflow_machines.rs | |
| +214 −14 | core/src/worker/workflow/managed_run.rs | |
| +1 −11 | core/src/worker/workflow/mod.rs | |
| +8 −0 | sdk-core-protos/src/history_builder.rs | |
| +131 −5 | tests/integ_tests/client_tests.rs | 
  
    
      This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
      Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
    
  
  
    
              
  
    
      This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
      Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
    
  
  
    
              | Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change | 
|---|---|---|
|  | @@ -310,3 +310,78 @@ def new_say_hello_worker(client: Client) -> Worker: | |
| workflows=[SayHelloWorkflow], | ||
| activities=[say_hello], | ||
| ) | ||
|  | ||
|  | ||
| @workflow.defn | ||
| class UpdateCompletionAfterWorkflowReturn: | ||
| def __init__(self) -> None: | ||
| self.workflow_returned = False | ||
|  | ||
| @workflow.run | ||
| async def run(self) -> str: | ||
| self.workflow_returned = True | ||
| return "workflow-result" | ||
|  | ||
| @workflow.update | ||
| async def my_update(self) -> str: | ||
| await workflow.wait_condition(lambda: self.workflow_returned) | ||
| return "update-result" | ||
|  | ||
|  | ||
| async def test_replayer_command_reordering_backward_compatibility() -> None: | ||
| """ | ||
| The UpdateCompletionAfterWorkflowReturn workflow above features an update handler that returns | ||
| after the main workflow coroutine has exited. It will (if an update is sent in the first WFT) | ||
| generate a raw command sequence (before sending to core) of | ||
| 
      Comment on lines
    
      +333
     to 
      +335
    
   There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Yeah, great comment, makes sense 👍 | ||
|  | ||
| [UpdateAccepted, CompleteWorkflowExecution, UpdateCompleted]. | ||
|  | ||
| Prior to https://github.com/temporalio/sdk-python/pull/569, Python truncated this command | ||
| sequence to | ||
|  | ||
| [UpdateAccepted, CompleteWorkflowExecution]. | ||
|  | ||
| With #569, Python performs no truncation, and Core changes it to | ||
|  | ||
| [UpdateAccepted, UpdateCompleted, CompleteWorkflowExecution]. | ||
|  | ||
| This test takes a history generated using pre-#569 SDK code, and replays it. This succeeds. | ||
| The history is | ||
|  | ||
| 1 WorkflowExecutionStarted | ||
| 2 WorkflowTaskScheduled | ||
| 3 WorkflowTaskStarted | ||
| 4 WorkflowTaskCompleted | ||
| 5 WorkflowExecutionUpdateAccepted | ||
| 6 WorkflowExecutionCompleted | ||
|  | ||
| Note that the history lacks a WorkflowExecutionUpdateCompleted event. | ||
|  | ||
| If Core's logic (which involves a flag) incorrectly allowed this history to be replayed | ||
| using Core's post-#569 implementation, then a non-determinism error would result. Specifically, | ||
| Core would, at some point during replay, do the following: | ||
|  | ||
| Receive [UpdateAccepted, CompleteWorkflowExecution, UpdateCompleted] from lang, | ||
| change that to [UpdateAccepted, UpdateCompleted, CompleteWorkflowExecution] | ||
| and create an UpdateMachine instance (the WorkflowTaskMachine instance already exists). | ||
| Then continue to consume history events. | ||
|  | ||
| Event 5 WorkflowExecutionUpdateAccepted would apply to the UpdateMachine associated with | ||
| the UpdateAccepted command, but event 6 WorkflowExecutionCompleted would not, since | ||
| core is expecting an event that can be applied to the UpdateMachine corresponding to | ||
| UpdateCompleted. If we modify core to incorrectly apply its new logic then we do see that: | ||
|  | ||
| [TMPRL1100] Nondeterminism error: Update machine does not handle this event: HistoryEvent(id: 6, WorkflowExecutionCompleted) | ||
|  | ||
| The test passes because core in fact (because the history lacks the flag) uses its old logic | ||
| and changes the command sequence from [UpdateAccepted, CompleteWorkflowExecution, UpdateCompleted] | ||
| to [UpdateAccepted, CompleteWorkflowExecution], and events 5 and 6 can be applied to the | ||
| corresponding state machines. | ||
| """ | ||
| with Path(__file__).with_name( | ||
| "test_replayer_command_reordering_backward_compatibility.json" | ||
| ).open() as f: | ||
| history = f.read() | ||
| await Replayer(workflows=[UpdateCompletionAfterWorkflowReturn]).replay_workflow( | ||
| WorkflowHistory.from_json("fake", history) | ||
| ) | ||
        
          
  
    
      
          
            113 changes: 113 additions & 0 deletions
          
          113 
        
  tests/worker/test_replayer_command_reordering_backward_compatibility.json
  
  
      
      
   
        
      
      
    
  
    
      This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
      Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
    
  
  
    
              | Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change | 
|---|---|---|
| @@ -0,0 +1,113 @@ | ||
| { | ||
| "events": [ | ||
| { | ||
| "eventId": "1", | ||
| "eventTime": "2024-08-02T23:35:00.061520Z", | ||
| "eventType": "EVENT_TYPE_WORKFLOW_EXECUTION_STARTED", | ||
| "taskId": "1049558", | ||
| "workflowExecutionStartedEventAttributes": { | ||
| "workflowType": { | ||
| "name": "UpdateCompletionAfterWorkflowReturn" | ||
| }, | ||
| "taskQueue": { | ||
| "name": "tq", | ||
| "kind": "TASK_QUEUE_KIND_NORMAL" | ||
| }, | ||
| "workflowTaskTimeout": "10s", | ||
| "originalExecutionRunId": "a32ce0cb-b50e-4734-b003-784dda811861", | ||
| "identity": "[email protected]", | ||
| "firstExecutionRunId": "a32ce0cb-b50e-4734-b003-784dda811861", | ||
| "attempt": 1, | ||
| "firstWorkflowTaskBackoff": "0s", | ||
| "workflowId": "wf-dd1e2267-d1bf-4822-be38-2a97a499331e" | ||
| } | ||
| }, | ||
| { | ||
| "eventId": "2", | ||
| "eventTime": "2024-08-02T23:35:00.070867Z", | ||
| "eventType": "EVENT_TYPE_WORKFLOW_TASK_SCHEDULED", | ||
| "taskId": "1049559", | ||
| "workflowTaskScheduledEventAttributes": { | ||
| "taskQueue": { | ||
| "name": "tq", | ||
| "kind": "TASK_QUEUE_KIND_NORMAL" | ||
| }, | ||
| "startToCloseTimeout": "10s", | ||
| "attempt": 1 | ||
| } | ||
| }, | ||
| { | ||
| "eventId": "3", | ||
| "eventTime": "2024-08-02T23:35:00.155562Z", | ||
| "eventType": "EVENT_TYPE_WORKFLOW_TASK_STARTED", | ||
| "taskId": "1049564", | ||
| "workflowTaskStartedEventAttributes": { | ||
| "scheduledEventId": "2", | ||
| "identity": "[email protected]", | ||
| "requestId": "b03f25fb-b2ab-4b93-b2ad-0f6899f6e2e2", | ||
| "historySizeBytes": "260" | ||
| } | ||
| }, | ||
| { | ||
| "eventId": "4", | ||
| "eventTime": "2024-08-02T23:35:00.224744Z", | ||
| "eventType": "EVENT_TYPE_WORKFLOW_TASK_COMPLETED", | ||
| "taskId": "1049568", | ||
| "workflowTaskCompletedEventAttributes": { | ||
| "scheduledEventId": "2", | ||
| "startedEventId": "3", | ||
| "identity": "[email protected]", | ||
| "workerVersion": { | ||
| "buildId": "17647b02191ec9e4e58b623a9c71f20a" | ||
| }, | ||
| "sdkMetadata": { | ||
| "coreUsedFlags": [ | ||
| 1, | ||
| 2 | ||
| ] | ||
| }, | ||
| "meteringMetadata": {} | ||
| } | ||
| }, | ||
| { | ||
| "eventId": "5", | ||
| "eventTime": "2024-08-02T23:35:00.242507Z", | ||
| "eventType": "EVENT_TYPE_WORKFLOW_EXECUTION_UPDATE_ACCEPTED", | ||
| "taskId": "1049569", | ||
| "workflowExecutionUpdateAcceptedEventAttributes": { | ||
| "protocolInstanceId": "my-update", | ||
| "acceptedRequestMessageId": "my-update/request", | ||
| "acceptedRequestSequencingEventId": "2", | ||
| "acceptedRequest": { | ||
| "meta": { | ||
| "updateId": "my-update", | ||
| "identity": "[email protected]" | ||
| }, | ||
| "input": { | ||
| "name": "my_update" | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
| }, | ||
| { | ||
| "eventId": "6", | ||
| "eventTime": "2024-08-02T23:35:00.258465Z", | ||
| "eventType": "EVENT_TYPE_WORKFLOW_EXECUTION_COMPLETED", | ||
| "taskId": "1049570", | ||
| "workflowExecutionCompletedEventAttributes": { | ||
| "result": { | ||
| "payloads": [ | ||
| { | ||
| "metadata": { | ||
| "encoding": "anNvbi9wbGFpbg==", | ||
| "encodingDecoded": "json/plain" | ||
| }, | ||
| "data": "workflow-result" | ||
| } | ||
| ] | ||
| }, | ||
| "workflowTaskCompletedEventId": "4" | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
| ] | ||
| } | 
      
      Oops, something went wrong.
        
    
  
  Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
  This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
  Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
  Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
  Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
  Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
  Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
  You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
  Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
  This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
  Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
  Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
  Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
  Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
  
    
  
    
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Any concerns that removing this is backwards incompatible w/ already completed workflows, or can you confirm that in no-flag-replaying situations the core behavior was always the same (sans query stuff)? One thing you can do is make a workflow that has post-complete command, run it in older SDK, grab JSON history, and run replayer in tests here with new code.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'm not quite following this bit of the question:
Here's how I am thinking of it:
sdk-python v1.0 was released in Jan 2023, and dropped post-terminal commands from the beginning, until this change.
Therefore, prior to this change, all Python WFTs had their post-terminal commands dropped.
Incidentally, Core started also dropping post-terminal commands since March 2023: Drop all post-terminal commands & sort activation jobs sdk-core#502
The new SDK code drops post-terminal commands when replaying without the flag set, and there is test coverage for this: https://github.com/temporalio/sdk-core/blob/master/core/src/core_tests/workflow_tasks.rs#L2558-L2577. Therefore we do not expect NDEs: the command sequence applied to core state machines when replaying without the flag will be the same as it was prior to this change.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Think about a user with an old workflow (i.e. sans flag). If you remove the old Python behavior that runs sans flag, it now relies on the old Core behavior sans flag. If that old behavior doesn't match Python's old behavior, they will get a non-determinism error. So we need to confirm that old Core code does the same thing as old Python code before removing old Python code. Did they drop post-terminal commands the same way? If so, we're all good here.
IMO you should grab a workflow history JSON or two from a workflow that had post-terminal commands from a Python SDK before this change, then run it through a replayer in the test on this version. There's a couple of other JSON files in the test suite that you can see how their tests are doing this. Also, I assume the test in this PR is testing that now commands after workflow complete are properly included?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Personally I would substitute
s/old Core/new Core/throughout this paragraph, since we're never going to be running old Core code: rather it's new Core code which, when replaying without the flag, is intended to behave as old Core did (i.e. truncating at first terminal command). This is tested in two different ways in the Core test suite, but I agree that SDK-specific tests replaying old workflows with post-terminal commands would be good too.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
👍 Makes sense, yeah whatever the terms are that mean "Workflows with post-complete commands on previous Python SDK versions work the exact same with this PR"
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Added the replay backward compatibility test. This should be ready to go.