Skip to content

stackstorm faster with-items#151

Open
ajcypherint wants to merge 3 commits intoStackStorm-Exchange:masterfrom
ajcypherint:stackwithitems
Open

stackstorm faster with-items#151
ajcypherint wants to merge 3 commits intoStackStorm-Exchange:masterfrom
ajcypherint:stackwithitems

Conversation

@ajcypherint
Copy link
Copy Markdown

Adds a pack and action to enable faster with-items in cases where the subworkflow or action does not contain an inquiry. This effectively eliminates the subworkflow / actions history from being stored in the parent workflows context. It results in speed gains due to mongodb write speeds on large context.

Comment thread stackstorm_withitems/actions/with_items.py Outdated
default: 25
result:
type: string
description: "jinja string to {_{ _.result.xxx }_} portion of result to return"
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I don't understand what this is trying to tell me, but I haven't had my ☕ yet today.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

you can specify a part of the json to return. see the unit tests for examples.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Okay, that explains that, but this parameter should have a better description so people don't have to dig through the unit tests for examples. You should be able to give examples, with expected output, right in the description.

@ajcypherint
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Author

These emails got buried in my gmail. I am reviewing now.

@CLAassistant
Copy link
Copy Markdown

CLA assistant check
Thank you for your submission! We really appreciate it. Like many open source projects, we ask that you sign our Contributor License Agreement before we can accept your contribution.
You have signed the CLA already but the status is still pending? Let us recheck it.

@cognifloyd
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

I'm going to closeand and reopen this to trigger the latest CI.

@cognifloyd cognifloyd closed this May 23, 2022
@cognifloyd cognifloyd reopened this May 23, 2022
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.

5 participants