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

Do not fast forward rrule if count is set #15696

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Dec 11, 2024

Conversation

fosterseth
Copy link
Member

@fosterseth fosterseth commented Dec 10, 2024

SUMMARY

Fixes a bug where a schedule that was created to run only once will continue to run repeatedly.

e.g. an rrule with
dtstart 20240730; count 1; freq MINUTELY

This job will run on 20240730, and should never run again.

However, the next time the schedule update_computed_fields runs, the dtstart will fast forward to today's date, and next_run will be computed from that. This will trigger the job to run again, which is not intended.

If count is set, we just should not fast forward the rrule and always calculate next_run based on original dtstart.

I missed this conditional when making the fast forwarded changes https://github.com/ansible/awx/pull/15601/files#diff-4e2b0c51faca14c32936465e8d8ce1d88673c02b45b684970f0df2aeb5091f46L220

ISSUE TYPE
  • Bug, Docs Fix or other nominal change
COMPONENT NAME
  • API

Fixes a bug where a schedule that was created
to run only once will continue to run repeatedly.

e.g. an rrule with
dtstart 20240730; count 1; freq MINUTELY

This job will run on 20240730, and should never
run again.

However, the next time the schedule
update_computed_fields runs, the dtstart
will fast forward to today's date, and
next_run will be computed from that. This will trigger
the job to run again, which is not intended.

If count is set, we just should not fast forward the
rrule and always calculate next_run based on original
dtstart.

Signed-off-by: Seth Foster <[email protected]>
@fosterseth fosterseth merged commit e605883 into ansible:devel Dec 11, 2024
26 checks passed
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