Task #3871
closed
Task model has PK that is not consistent with the rest of the data model.
Status:
CLOSED - CURRENTRELEASE
- Description updated (diff)
- Tracker changed from Issue to Task
- Sprint/Milestone set to 3.0.0
- % Done set to 0
I think this is a fine idea. +1.
- Assignee set to CodeHeeler
- Status changed from NEW to ASSIGNED
- Sprint changed from Sprint 44 to Sprint 45
- Sprint changed from Sprint 45 to Sprint 46
- Assignee changed from CodeHeeler to daviddavis
Should I expose job_id
in the REST API? On the one hand, it shouldn't be something users need or ought to know but on the other, it might help to debug.
+1 to exposing it. They may want to correlate it with a RQ monitoring system they setup separately.
bmbouter wrote:
+1 to exposing it. They may want to correlate it with a RQ monitoring system they setup separately.
+1 for same ^^ reasons.
- Status changed from ASSIGNED to POST
- Status changed from POST to MODIFIED
- % Done changed from 0 to 100
- Status changed from MODIFIED to CLOSED - CURRENTRELEASE
Also available in: Atom
PDF
Create a new Task field job_id to store rq job ids
fixes #3871 https://pulp.plan.io/issues/3871