Skip to content

Fix/release concurrency group between unit and integration#256

Merged
aliev merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
fix/release-concurrency-group
May 25, 2026
Merged

Fix/release concurrency group between unit and integration#256
aliev merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
fix/release-concurrency-group

Conversation

@aliev
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@aliev aliev commented May 25, 2026

Why

release.yml calls the reusable run_tests.yml twice in the same run — once for marker: 'not integration', once for marker: 'integration'. Both call sites computed the same concurrency group key (${{ github.workflow }}-${{ github.ref }} resolves identically when the caller workflow and branch are the same), so whichever test job started second cancelled the first via cancel-in-progress: true.

That left one of the two test jobs in cancelled, which meant the release job's needs: [prepare, test-unit, test-integration] could not be satisfied and publication was skipped. The v3.4.0 attempt at https://github.com/GetStream/stream-py/actions/runs/26415677026 is an example — all Test (integration) jobs cancelled the moment Test (unit) started.

Including inputs.marker in the group key gives each call its own concurrency lane, so unit and integration runs no longer cancel each other.

The PR title intentionally does not use a conventional-commits prefix (fix:/feat:), so the auto-release path won't try to bump on merge — the release should be retriggered manually via workflow_dispatch after this lands.

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • Chores
    • Improved test workflow concurrency handling to better manage concurrent test executions with different input parameters.

Review Change Stack

`release.yml` calls the reusable `run_tests.yml` twice in the same run
(once for `marker: 'not integration'`, once for `marker: 'integration'`).
Both call sites computed the same concurrency group
(`${{ github.workflow }}-${{ github.ref }}` resolves identically when the
caller workflow and branch are the same), so whichever job started second
cancelled the first via `cancel-in-progress: true`. With one of the test
jobs in `cancelled`, the `release` job's `needs:` couldn't satisfy and
publication was skipped.

Adding `inputs.marker` to the group key gives each call a distinct
concurrency lane so unit and integration runs no longer cancel each other.
@coderabbitai
Copy link
Copy Markdown

coderabbitai Bot commented May 25, 2026

No actionable comments were generated in the recent review. 🎉

ℹ️ Recent review info
⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: defaults

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

Run ID: ef540425-f4a5-43a5-9402-82ce175bf939

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 797f0a9 and 7c7b36d.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)
  • .github/workflows/run_tests.yml

📝 Walkthrough

Walkthrough

The workflow concurrency group is updated to include the marker input parameter alongside the existing github.workflow and github.ref values, so test runs triggered with different marker inputs will no longer be grouped into the same concurrency slot and will execute independently.

Changes

CI Configuration

Layer / File(s) Summary
Concurrency group configuration
.github/workflows/run_tests.yml
Concurrency group appends ${{ inputs.marker }} to the grouping key, allowing concurrent test runs with different markers to avoid queueing against each other.

Estimated code review effort

🎯 1 (Trivial) | ⏱️ ~3 minutes

Poem

🐰 A marker input, now held dear,
Keeps workflow runs from interfering here,
Each test can run with separate grace,
No queueing in the concurrency space! ✨

🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 5
✅ Passed checks (5 passed)
Check name Status Explanation
Description Check ✅ Passed Check skipped - CodeRabbit’s high-level summary is enabled.
Title check ✅ Passed The title accurately summarizes the main change: adding marker-based concurrency group separation to prevent unit and integration test runs from canceling each other.
Docstring Coverage ✅ Passed No functions found in the changed files to evaluate docstring coverage. Skipping docstring coverage check.
Linked Issues check ✅ Passed Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request.
Out of Scope Changes check ✅ Passed Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request.

✏️ Tip: You can configure your own custom pre-merge checks in the settings.

✨ Finishing Touches
🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
  • Create PR with unit tests
  • Commit unit tests in branch fix/release-concurrency-group

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands and usage tips.

@aliev aliev marked this pull request as ready for review May 25, 2026 19:10
@aliev aliev merged commit 20bcf68 into main May 25, 2026
25 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants