refactor(engine): pass Python worker startup arguments by name#5597
Open
yangzhang75 wants to merge 2 commits into
Open
refactor(engine): pass Python worker startup arguments by name#5597yangzhang75 wants to merge 2 commits into
yangzhang75 wants to merge 2 commits into
Conversation
Codecov Report❌ Patch coverage is
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #5597 +/- ##
============================================
+ Coverage 52.38% 52.39% +0.01%
+ Complexity 2484 2480 -4
============================================
Files 1070 1070
Lines 41359 41369 +10
Branches 4441 4441
============================================
+ Hits 21666 21677 +11
+ Misses 18427 18423 -4
- Partials 1266 1269 +3
*This pull request uses carry forward flags. Click here to find out more. ☔ View full report in Codecov by Harness. 🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
Contributor
|
Could you assign a reviewer for this PR? @chenlica |
Yicong-Huang
requested changes
Jun 10, 2026
Yicong-Huang
left a comment
Yicong-Huang
left a comment
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks for the change. We need to add tests to guard the behavior.
Contributor
Author
|
@Yicong-Huang I added unit tests for the mapping and missing-key behavior in the latest commit, CI's green. Could you take another look? Thanks! |
Comment on lines
+101
to
+112
| @pytest.mark.parametrize("missing_key", sorted(_full_config().keys())) | ||
| def test_main_raises_keyerror_when_a_field_is_missing(missing_key): | ||
| """A missing/renamed key fails loudly rather than being silently misassigned.""" | ||
| config = _full_config() | ||
| del config[missing_key] | ||
| with ( | ||
| mock.patch.object(entry, "StorageConfig"), | ||
| mock.patch.object(entry, "PythonWorker"), | ||
| mock.patch.object(entry, "init_loguru_logger"), | ||
| ): | ||
| with pytest.raises(KeyError): | ||
| entry.main(json.dumps(config)) |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think we need to guard it a big tighter, so that we know once a drift happens.
please include tests about
- having extra configs. -> should fail
- having wrong types. -> should fail
- having wrong orders -> should succeed as json/dict is used
- having duplicate configs -> should fail on scala side. (do we have tests for scala side yet?)
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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
4 participants
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 changes were proposed in this PR?
Passes Python worker startup configuration by name instead of by argv position, as proposed in the issue.
PythonWorkflowWorker (JVM) previously built ~19 positional command-line arguments, and texera_run_python_worker.py unpacked them positionally. Because the two sides agreed only by index, adding/removing/reordering one argument could silently misassign values.
The set of keys written on the Scala side and read on the Python side is identical (19 keys). No behavior change otherwise.
Any related issues, documentation, discussions?
Closes #5547
How was this PR tested?
WorkflowExecutionService/compile(amber) succeeds.scalafmtCheckAllpasses; scalafix rules (RemoveUnused, ProcedureSyntax) are satisfied (the new import is used).py_compile.Was this PR authored or co-authored using generative AI tooling?
Generated-by: Claude Code (Claude Opus 4.8)