-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 195
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
[JENKINS-53358] Remove bogus persistence calls due to notifyListeners #234
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Changes from all commits
4f4515f
98a196d
c7938ba
0f2659d
6018642
7105b62
6cd93b7
ed5b77d
4e6b7f1
a504dac
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
|
@@ -1441,7 +1441,11 @@ void notifyListeners(List<FlowNode> nodes, boolean synchronous) { | |
} | ||
} finally { | ||
if (synchronous) { | ||
bc.abort(); // hack to skip save—we are holding a lock | ||
bc.abort(); //// hack to skip save—we are holding a lock | ||
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. Why the introduced 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. Just to see if people are paying attention |
||
} else if (!(getDurabilityHint().isPersistWithEveryStep()) && !(nodes.stream().anyMatch(x->x instanceof FlowEndNode))) { | ||
// We do not want to invoke gratuitous save calls if we aren't set to persist with every step | ||
// Except that we MUST trigger a persistence call at the very end of the execution | ||
bc.abort(); | ||
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. We aren't worried about whether this causes JENKINS-50199 to happen more often because even if it does, it should only matter when reloading configuration from disk, and that case is now handled by jenkinsci/workflow-job-plugin#104, right? 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. @dwnusbaum Correct -- and if the cause of JENKINS-50199 is still triggered, then that's a bug somewhere else -- if we were relying on this to trigger persistence, that's a clear bug. |
||
} else { | ||
try { | ||
bc.commit(); | ||
|
@@ -1493,10 +1497,6 @@ public boolean isPaused() { | |
return false; | ||
} | ||
|
||
private void setPersistedClean(boolean persistedClean) { // Workaround for some issues with anonymous classes. | ||
this.persistedClean = persistedClean; | ||
} | ||
|
||
/** | ||
* Pause or unpause the execution. | ||
* | ||
|
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.
Only until I cut the release, then it will be converted to the final release version and this will be cleaned up