feat: Surfacing heartbeat counts for activities#10020
Merged
davidporter-id-au merged 17 commits intotemporalio:mainfrom Apr 27, 2026
Merged
feat: Surfacing heartbeat counts for activities#10020davidporter-id-au merged 17 commits intotemporalio:mainfrom
davidporter-id-au merged 17 commits intotemporalio:mainfrom
Conversation
davidporter-id-au
changed the title
Contributor
Author
|
This probably needs some more tests too, I'm just putting it in draft for early feedback |
davidporter-id-au
changed the title
fretz12
reviewed
Apr 23, 2026
fretz12
reviewed
Apr 24, 2026
| require.True(t, hbResp.CancelRequested) | ||
| }) | ||
|
|
||
| t.Run("HeartbeatDetailsAvailableOnRetry", func(t *testing.T) { |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
can you extend this test so that we're counting the heartbeats across retries? You have one that validates multiple heartbeats but this scenario checks it across retries.
It'd be Poll1 -> Heartbeat1 -> Fail1 -> Poll2 -> Heartbeat2 -> Complete2 -> Describe (assert count=2)
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Good call, let me add
fretz12
approved these changes
Apr 27, 2026
| }) | ||
| require.NoError(t, err) | ||
|
|
||
| require.Equal(t, int64(2), desc.Info.GetTotalHeartbeatCount(), "total heartbeat count") |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
nit: Wwe use the proto getters for better safety in general, though doesn't really matter here as it's always nonnil
Suggested change
| require.Equal(t, int64(2), desc.Info.GetTotalHeartbeatCount(), "total heartbeat count") | |
| require.Equal(t, int64(2), desc.GetInfo().GetTotalHeartbeatCount(), "total heartbeat count") |
| "go.temporal.io/server/api/historyservice/v1" | ||
| "go.temporal.io/server/chasm" | ||
| "go.temporal.io/server/chasm/lib/activity/gen/activitypb/v1" | ||
| activitypb "go.temporal.io/server/chasm/lib/activity/gen/activitypb/v1" |
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
huh, I didn't know goimports supported that
| desc, err := s.FrontendClient().DescribeActivityExecution(ctx, &workflowservice.DescribeActivityExecutionRequest{ | ||
| Namespace: s.Namespace().String(), | ||
| ActivityId: activityID, | ||
| IncludeOutcome: true, |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
nit: not needed for this test
5 tasks
davidporter-id-au
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 27, 2026
## What changed? This is some fast-follow feedback items for the PR #10020. ## Why? Automerge landed the changes before I could respond, so just adding these followup items here. ## How did you test it? - [ ] built - [ ] run locally and tested manually - [ ] covered by existing tests - [ ] added new unit test(s) - [ ] added new functional test(s) ## Potential risks small test changes only, very low risk
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
2 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 changed?
This surfaces the total count of received activities by the server-side (noting that they'll be throttled client-side under frequent heartbeating scenarios, so this is likely to be an undercount of the user calls to activity.RecordHeartbeat).
This should be a field visible for the DescribeActivityInfo call.
Why?
UX improvement for users
How did you test it?
Potential risks
None identified yet