fix: add timestamp to trigger immediately signal #7968
Merged
Conversation
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
…r-immediately-bug
dnr
reviewed
Jun 25, 2025
spkane31
added a commit
to temporalio/api
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 25, 2025
_**READ BEFORE MERGING:** All PRs require approval by both Server AND SDK teams before merging! This is why the number of required approvals is "2" and not "1"--two reviewers from the same team is NOT sufficient. If your PR is not approved by someone in BOTH teams, it may be summarily reverted._ <!-- Describe what has changed in this PR --> **What changed?** adding a timestamp to `TriggerImmediatelyRequest` message <!-- Tell your future self why have you made these changes --> We can make the wft “more idempotent”: put the desired trigger time in the trigger immediately request itself, so it goes in the signal payload, so all wfts attempt to start the target with the same id. <!-- Are there any breaking changes on binary or code level? --> **Breaking changes** <!-- If this breaks the Server, please provide the Server PR to merge right after this PR was merged. --> [**Server PR**](temporalio/temporal#7968)
temporal-cicd bot
pushed a commit
to temporalio/api-go
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 25, 2025
_**READ BEFORE MERGING:** All PRs require approval by both Server AND SDK teams before merging! This is why the number of required approvals is "2" and not "1"--two reviewers from the same team is NOT sufficient. If your PR is not approved by someone in BOTH teams, it may be summarily reverted._ <!-- Describe what has changed in this PR --> **What changed?** adding a timestamp to `TriggerImmediatelyRequest` message <!-- Tell your future self why have you made these changes --> We can make the wft “more idempotent”: put the desired trigger time in the trigger immediately request itself, so it goes in the signal payload, so all wfts attempt to start the target with the same id. <!-- Are there any breaking changes on binary or code level? --> **Breaking changes** <!-- If this breaks the Server, please provide the Server PR to merge right after this PR was merged. --> [**Server PR**](temporalio/temporal#7968)
dnr
approved these changes
Jun 25, 2025
dnr
reviewed
Jun 27, 2025
service/worker/scheduler/testdata/replay_with_trigger_immediately_timestamp.json.gz
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
| { | ||
| at: time.Date(2022, 6, 1, 0, 30, 0, 0, time.UTC), | ||
| f: func() { | ||
| // this one runs with overridden overlap policy | ||
| s.env.SignalWorkflow(SignalNamePatch, &schedulepb.SchedulePatch{ | ||
| TriggerImmediately: &schedulepb.TriggerImmediatelyRequest{ | ||
| ScheduledTime: timestamppb.New(time.Date(2022, 6, 1, 0, 30, 0, 0, time.UTC)), |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
should we change the value to check that it's actually used?
I think then we'll need to bump the current version in this test?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Changing the ScheduledTime to ScheduledTime: timestamppb.New(time.Date(2022, 6, 1, 0, 40, 0, 0, time.UTC)), will cause the test to fail with:
Error Trace: /Users/seankane/git/github.com/temporalio/temporal/service/worker/scheduler/workflow_test.go:305
/Users/seankane/git/github.com/temporalio/temporal/service/worker/scheduler/workflow_test.go:1137
Error: Not equal:
expected: 2
actual : 1
Test: TestWorkflow/TestTriggerImmediate
Messages: started map[string]time.Time{"myid-2022-06-01T00:15:00Z":time.Date(2022, time.June, 1, 0, 15, 0, 0, time.UTC)}I think that shows it's used as we expect. I don't see a way to indicate a test should fail though so I'm not sure what the change here should be
dnr
approved these changes
Jun 27, 2025
yycptt
pushed a commit
to temporalio/api
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 4, 2025
_**READ BEFORE MERGING:** All PRs require approval by both Server AND SDK teams before merging! This is why the number of required approvals is "2" and not "1"--two reviewers from the same team is NOT sufficient. If your PR is not approved by someone in BOTH teams, it may be summarily reverted._ <!-- Describe what has changed in this PR --> **What changed?** adding a timestamp to `TriggerImmediatelyRequest` message <!-- Tell your future self why have you made these changes --> We can make the wft “more idempotent”: put the desired trigger time in the trigger immediately request itself, so it goes in the signal payload, so all wfts attempt to start the target with the same id. <!-- Are there any breaking changes on binary or code level? --> **Breaking changes** <!-- If this breaks the Server, please provide the Server PR to merge right after this PR was merged. --> [**Server PR**](temporalio/temporal#7968)
yycptt
pushed a commit
to temporalio/api-go
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 4, 2025
_**READ BEFORE MERGING:** All PRs require approval by both Server AND SDK teams before merging! This is why the number of required approvals is "2" and not "1"--two reviewers from the same team is NOT sufficient. If your PR is not approved by someone in BOTH teams, it may be summarily reverted._ <!-- Describe what has changed in this PR --> **What changed?** adding a timestamp to `TriggerImmediatelyRequest` message <!-- Tell your future self why have you made these changes --> We can make the wft “more idempotent”: put the desired trigger time in the trigger immediately request itself, so it goes in the signal payload, so all wfts attempt to start the target with the same id. <!-- Are there any breaking changes on binary or code level? --> **Breaking changes** <!-- If this breaks the Server, please provide the Server PR to merge right after this PR was merged. --> [**Server PR**](temporalio/temporal#7968)
yycptt
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 5, 2025
## What changed? add a timestamp to the `TriggerImmediately` schedule for use instead of now() ## Why? We can make the wft “more idempotent”: put the desired trigger time in the trigger immediately request itself, so it goes in the signal payload, so all wfts attempt to start the target with the same id. ## How did you test it? - [ ] built - [ ] run locally and tested manually - [ ] covered by existing tests - [x] added new unit test(s) - [ ] added new functional test(s) ## Potential risks TBD @dnr @lina-temporal
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.
What changed?
add a timestamp to the
TriggerImmediatelyschedule for use instead of now()Why?
We can make the wft “more idempotent”: put the desired trigger time in the trigger immediately request itself, so it goes in the signal payload, so all wfts attempt to start the target with the same id.
How did you test it?
Potential risks
TBD @dnr @lina-temporal