Mrhs121 commented on code in PR #17887:
URL:
https://github.com/apache/dolphinscheduler/pull/17887#discussion_r2705120759
##########
dolphinscheduler-api/src/main/java/org/apache/dolphinscheduler/api/service/impl/WorkflowDefinitionServiceImpl.java:
##########
@@ -428,6 +428,10 @@ private List<WorkflowTaskLineage>
generateWorkflowLineageList(List<TaskDefinitio
.parseObject(taskDefinitionLog.getTaskParams(),
DependentParameters.class)
.getDependence().getDependTaskList()) {
for (DependentItem dependentItem :
dependentTaskModel.getDependItemList()) {
+ // A Dependent node cannot rely on itself workflow
+ if (dependentItem.getDefinitionCode() ==
workflowDefinitionCode) {
+ throw new
ServiceException(Status.WORKFLOW_NODE_HAS_CYCLE);
+ }
Review Comment:
Thank you for your review—your suggestion makes sense.
However, I’m concerned that this change could break the existing design,
since the current documentation explicitly permits this configuration of the
dependent node. I’m not yet sure which behavior should be considered correct;
please see my comment for details:
https://github.com/apache/dolphinscheduler/issues/17873#issuecomment-3742465070
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]
