api: retry conflicts as a workaround #169
Open
Conversation
This file contains 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
mcobzarenco
force-pushed
the
retry-conflicts
branch
from
cd1e772
to
50dfb6c
Compare
|
@annesylvie I was too fast, it didn't compile 😓 -- fixed now! |
annesylvie
approved these changes
Feb 27, 2023
mcobzarenco
force-pushed
the
retry-conflicts
branch
2 times, most recently
from
b5f23bc
to
6f9bd73
Compare
This is a workaround for comment creation / updates conflicting with the `loom` service that indexes threads objects concurrently. We will be fixing this properly in the backend, but as a workaround we will retry conflicts for now.
mcobzarenco
force-pushed
the
retry-conflicts
branch
from
6f9bd73
to
c7011eb
Compare
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
This is a workaround for comment creation / updates conflicting with the
loomservice that indexes threads objects concurrently. We will be fixing this properly in the backend, but as a workaround we will retry conflicts for now.