-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 84
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
add ability to view multiple focused log lines at once #4637
Changes from all commits
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 |
---|---|---|
|
@@ -21,8 +21,8 @@ export interface JobData extends BasicJobData { | |
logUrl?: string; | ||
durationS?: number; | ||
queueTimeS?: number; | ||
failureLine?: string; | ||
failureLineNumber?: number; | ||
failureLines?: string[]; | ||
failureLineNumbers?: number[]; | ||
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. I think we might want to consider updating For the context, this failure line field is pretty important because it now influences how Dr.CI and mergebot detects flaky failures (I search for similar failures using this field as the input) A request I have for later is to make sure that the failures are sorted so that the last failure is at index 0 and the first failure is the last one in the list, thoughts? 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. May be it's better to do this in a separate PR, as this one is pretty big already. |
||
failureCaptures?: string[]; | ||
repo?: string; | ||
failureAnnotation?: string; | ||
|
@@ -41,7 +41,7 @@ export interface RecentWorkflowsData extends BasicJobData { | |
head_branch?: string | null; | ||
pr_number?: number; | ||
failure_captures: string[]; | ||
failure_line?: string | null; | ||
failure_lines?: string[] | null; | ||
} | ||
|
||
export interface Artifact { | ||
|
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.
Is this a correct understanding that this is only a cosmetic change atm because the current log classifier will always return only one failure line? So this would be an array one just one string
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.
yep it's just cosmetic atm