Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Warn on RunTask failures #93

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Jun 16, 2024
Merged
Show file tree
Hide file tree
Changes from 2 commits
Commits
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension


Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
2 changes: 1 addition & 1 deletion .eslintrc.json
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -6,7 +6,7 @@
},
"extends": "eslint:recommended",
"parserOptions": {
"ecmaVersion": 6,
"ecmaVersion": 8,
"sourceType": "script"
},
"rules": {
Expand Down
6 changes: 6 additions & 0 deletions index.js
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -74,6 +74,12 @@ module.exports = function (options, cb) {
return taskRunner.runPromisified(params);
})
.then((taskDefinition) => {
if (taskDefinition.failures) {
console.error("Task failed to launch:")
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think it's fine to just throw the error - anything interested should catch it and log as appropriate. This is intended to be used as a library after all.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Will do

console.error(JSON.stringify(taskDefinition.failures))
throw new Error("ECS RunTask returned failure messages", { cause: taskDefinition.failures });
}

const taskArn = taskDefinition.tasks[0].taskArn;
const taskId = taskArn.substring(taskArn.lastIndexOf('/') + 1);
const formatter = new FormatStream();
Expand Down
2 changes: 1 addition & 1 deletion package.json
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -10,7 +10,7 @@
"ecs-task-runner": "./bin/ecs-task-runner"
},
"scripts": {
"test": "NODE_ENV=test ./node_modules/.bin/mocha --recursive"
"test": "NODE_ENV=test ./node_modules/.bin/mocha --parallel --recursive"
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

would avoid parallel usage, I remember some problems with one of these codebases where it was not really concurrency safe

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Well, this is one of them apparently. I removed parallel and now tests won't pass lol

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

m-radzikowski/aws-sdk-client-mock#64
Apparently mocha has weird behavior with aws-sdk-client-mock, shuffling up the mockClient invocations resolves it.

},
"repository": {
"type": "git",
Expand Down
111 changes: 111 additions & 0 deletions test/index.js
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -0,0 +1,111 @@
'use strict'

const { mockClient } = require('aws-sdk-client-mock');
const { ECS, DescribeTaskDefinitionCommand, RunTaskCommand } = require("@aws-sdk/client-ecs");
const { CloudWatchLogs, GetLogEventsCommand } = require("@aws-sdk/client-cloudwatch-logs");
const expect = require('expect.js');
const { promisify } = require('node:util');
const index = promisify(require('../index'));

describe('index', function () {
const cwlMock = mockClient(CloudWatchLogs);
const ecsMock = mockClient(ECS);
afterEach(() => {
cwlMock.reset();
ecsMock.reset();
});

it('should do the thing', async function () {
const options = {
taskDefinitionArn: 'task-definition.arn',
containerName: 'meow'
};

ecsMock.on(DescribeTaskDefinitionCommand).callsFake(async params => {
expect(params.taskDefinition).to.eql(options.taskDefinitionArn)

return {
taskDefinition: {
taskDefinitionArn: options.taskDefinitionArn,
containerDefinitions: [{
name: options.containerName,
logConfiguration: {
logDriver: 'awslogs',
options: { 'awslogs-group': '', 'awslogs-stream-prefix': '' },
}
}],
}
}
});

// thread the randon EOF through to kill the stream
let eofSet;
const eof = new Promise(r => {
eofSet = r;
})
ecsMock.on(RunTaskCommand).callsFake(async params => {
expect(params.taskDefinition).to.eql(options.taskDefinitionArn)

eofSet(params.overrides.containerOverrides[0].command[2].split(' ')[9])
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I don't really get what this does

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I'll add a comment, but yeah this is ugliest bit of this. This is the only place we can grab the random value the log stuff uses to detect the end of the task run.


return {
tasks: [{
taskArn: ''
}]
}
});

cwlMock.on(GetLogEventsCommand).callsFake(async _params => {
return {
events: [{
timestamp: 1477346285562,
message: Buffer.from(await eof).toString('base64'),
}]
};
});

// if this returns without crashing we're gucci
return index(options);
});


it('should warn us when a task fails to launch', async function () {
const options = {
taskDefinitionArn: 'task-definition.arn',
containerName: 'meow'
};

ecsMock.on(DescribeTaskDefinitionCommand).callsFake(async params => {
expect(params.taskDefinition).to.eql(options.taskDefinitionArn)

return {
taskDefinition: {
taskDefinitionArn: options.taskDefinitionArn,
containerDefinitions: [{
name: options.containerName,
logConfiguration: {
logDriver: 'awslogs',
options: { 'awslogs-group': '', 'awslogs-stream-prefix': '' },
}
}],
}
}
});

const reason = 'ECS is haunted'
ecsMock.on(RunTaskCommand).callsFake(async params => {
expect(params.taskDefinition).to.eql(options.taskDefinitionArn)

return {
failures: [{ reason }]
}
});

try {
await index(options);
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

why not something like expect(index(options).to.throw ... ?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

It didn't work ¯_(ツ)_/¯
expect.js hasn't been updated in a decade, maybe they don't support promises?

Copy link
Contributor Author

@liath liath Jun 13, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think mocha and expect.js might be kind dead projects. Something that annoyed my the whole time in working on this is that errors were always "test timed out" and apparently that's just mocha being terrible with promises.
mochajs/mocha#2640

expect().fail("App should have thrown an error about ECS returning errors")
} catch (err) {
expect(err.cause[0].reason).to.eql(reason)
}
});
});
Loading