fix sync for map over lp in dynamic #3155
Merged
Conversation
This file contains 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
Signed-off-by: Troy Chiu <[email protected]>
Code Review Agent Run Status
|
Codecov ReportAttention: Patch coverage is
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #3155 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 78.58% 77.45% -1.14%
==========================================
Files 284 212 -72
Lines 25356 22027 -3329
Branches 2865 2864 -1
==========================================
- Hits 19926 17060 -2866
+ Misses 4650 4134 -516
- Partials 780 833 +53 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
troychiu
requested review from
wild-endeavor,
kumare3,
eapolinario,
pingsutw,
cosmicBboy,
samhita-alla,
thomasjpfan and
Future-Outlier
as code owners
eapolinario
approved these changes
Feb 25, 2025
Code Review Agent Run #df4fb4Actionable Suggestions - 2
Additional Suggestions - 1
Review Details
AI Code Review powered by |
flyte-bot
reviewed
Feb 25, 2025
| node_launch_plans[node.workflow_node.launchplan_ref] = self.client.get_launch_plan( | ||
| node.workflow_node.launchplan_ref | ||
| ).spec | ||
| self.find_launch_plan_for_node(node, node_launch_plans) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Consider adding error handling for launch plans
Consider adding error handling for find_launch_plan_for_node to handle potential exceptions when fetching launch plans. The method may fail silently if there are issues accessing the launch plans.
Code suggestion
Check the AI-generated fix before applying
Suggested change
| self.find_launch_plan_for_node(node, node_launch_plans) | |
| try: | |
| self.find_launch_plan_for_node(node, node_launch_plans) | |
| except FlyteEntityNotExistException as e: | |
| logger.warning(f"Failed to fetch launch plan for node {node.id}: {str(e)}") |
Code Review Run #df4fb4
Should Bito avoid suggestions like this for future reviews? (Manage Rules)
- Yes, avoid them
flyte-bot
reviewed
Feb 25, 2025
Comment on lines
+513
to
+515
| def find_launch_plan_for_node( | ||
| self, node: Node, node_launch_plans: Dict[id_models, launch_plan_models.LaunchPlanSpec] | ||
| ): |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Consider simplifying complex nested logic
Consider breaking down the find_launch_plan_for_node method into smaller, more focused methods. The current implementation has multiple nested functions and complex branching logic which could be simplified for better maintainability. Consider extracting the branch node handling logic into a separate method.
Code suggestion
Check the AI-generated fix before applying
Suggested change
| def find_launch_plan_for_node( | |
| self, node: Node, node_launch_plans: Dict[id_models, launch_plan_models.LaunchPlanSpec] | |
| ): | |
| def _handle_then_node( | |
| self, child_then_node: Node, node_launch_plans: Dict[id_models, launch_plan_models.LaunchPlanSpec] | |
| ) -> None: | |
| if child_then_node.branch_node: | |
| self._handle_branch_node(child_then_node.branch_node, node_launch_plans) | |
| elif child_then_node.workflow_node and child_then_node.workflow_node.launchplan_ref: | |
| lp_ref = child_then_node.workflow_node.launchplan_ref | |
| self.find_launch_plan(lp_ref, node_launch_plans) | |
| def _handle_branch_node( | |
| self, branch_node: BranchNode, node_launch_plans: Dict[id_models, launch_plan_models.LaunchPlanSpec] | |
| ) -> None: | |
| if branch_node and branch_node.if_else: | |
| branch = branch_node.if_else | |
| if branch.case and branch.case.then_node: | |
| self._handle_then_node(branch.case.then_node, node_launch_plans) | |
| if branch.other: | |
| for o in branch.other: | |
| if o.then_node: | |
| self._handle_then_node(o.then_node, node_launch_plans) | |
| if branch.else_node: | |
| if branch.else_node.branch_node: | |
| self._handle_branch_node(branch.else_node.branch_node, node_launch_plans) | |
| elif branch.else_node.workflow_node and branch.else_node.workflow_node.launchplan_ref: | |
| lp_ref = branch.else_node.workflow_node.launchplan_ref | |
| self.find_launch_plan(lp_ref, node_launch_plans) | |
| def find_launch_plan_for_node( | |
| self, node: Node, node_launch_plans: Dict[id_models, launch_plan_models.LaunchPlanSpec] | |
| ): |
Code Review Run #df4fb4
Should Bito avoid suggestions like this for future reviews? (Manage Rules)
- Yes, avoid them
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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.
Why are the changes needed?
Currently if we call sync_node_execution on an execution contains map over lp in dynamic workflow, we'll get error like
because we didn't inspect launch plan inside an array node in dynamic case.
What changes were proposed in this pull request?
How was this patch tested?
tested with a dynamic workflow which contains map over launch plan and I was able to call sync_node_execution and get the correct data.
Check all the applicable boxes
Summary by Bito
This PR addresses a bug in sync_node_execution where launch plans within array nodes of dynamic workflows were causing KeyError exceptions. The implementation has been refactored to properly inspect and handle launch plans inside array nodes, with improved code organization through method separation and enhanced support for map operations over launch plans.Unit tests added: False
Estimated effort to review (1-5, lower is better): 1