Fix for lost error/escalation events

[jbirddog]

Work on #2037

The bugs in this ticket were related to unhandled error/escalation events that were lost during serialization (they have the same lifetime as message events from Spiff). This could be seen if instructions or a human task were present between the unhandled event and the end event for instance. Fix is to not check if the workflow is complete since these events are only returned by get_events if nothing in the workflow can handle them. Confirmed this in a chat with @essweine.

Summary by CodeRabbit

• Bug Fixes
  • Updated error handling logic to improve the detection of workflow execution issues, potentially raising errors more frequently based on event presence.

[coderabbitai]

Walkthrough

Walkthrough

The changes involve a modification to the conditional logic in the process_bpmn_events method of the WorkflowExecutionService class. The condition for raising a WorkflowExecutionServiceError has been simplified by removing the requirement for the bpmn_process_instance to be completed, allowing the error to be raised solely based on the presence of elements in bpmn_event_groups.

Changes

Files	Change Summary
spiffworkflow-backend/src/spiffworkflow_backend/services/workflow_execution_service.py	Modified the conditional logic in the process_bpmn_events method to raise an error based solely on the presence of elements in bpmn_event_groups, removing the check for bpmn_process_instance.is_completed().

Tip

We have updated our review workflow to use the Anthropic's Claude family of models. Please share any feedback in the discussion post on our Discord.

---

Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media?

Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

• Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
  • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>.
  • Generate unit testing code for this file.
  • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
• Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
  • @coderabbitai generate unit testing code for this file.
  • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
• PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
  • @coderabbitai generate interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table.
  • @coderabbitai show all the console.log statements in this repository.
  • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit testing code.
  • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.
  • @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments.

CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)

• @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
• @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
• @coderabbitai review to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
• @coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
• @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
• @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
• @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
• @coderabbitai help to get help.

Other keywords and placeholders

• Add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.
• Add @coderabbitai summary to generate the high-level summary at a specific location in the PR description.
• Add @coderabbitai anywhere in the PR title to generate the title automatically.

Documentation and Community

• Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
• Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
• Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

[coderabbitai]

Actionable comments posted: 0

Review details

Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL

Commits

Files that changed from the base of the PR and between d8627ce and c6a6493.

Files selected for processing (1)

• spiffworkflow-backend/src/spiffworkflow_backend/services/workflow_execution_service.py (1 hunks)

Additional comments not posted (1)

spiffworkflow-backend/src/spiffworkflow_backend/services/workflow_execution_service.py (1)

614-616: Simplified the condition for raising WorkflowExecutionServiceError on unhandled events.

The conditional logic for raising the error has been modified to remove the check for self.bpmn_process_instance.is_completed(). This means the error will now be raised if there are any unhandled events remaining in bpmn_event_groups, regardless of the completion status of the process instance.

Verify the impact of this change:

• Ensure raising the error more frequently does not cause any unexpected behavior or side effects in the rest of the codebase and system.
• Confirm if it is acceptable to raise the error even when the process instance is not completed.

Run this script to search for potential impact: