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

Add activty type as an option for activity API #533

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jan 27, 2025

Conversation

ychebotarev
Copy link
Contributor

@ychebotarev ychebotarev commented Jan 27, 2025

What changed?
remove acitvity_id as a single option for Activity API.
Now callers can chose to pause/undate/unpause/reset all the pending activities of a certain type.

Why?
Design review feedback.
If multiple activities are running in parallel they are usually of the same type, and experience the same problem.

Breaking changes
No with current implementation.

@ychebotarev ychebotarev requested review from a team as code owners January 27, 2025 18:17
@ychebotarev ychebotarev merged commit 7b750b0 into y_batch_activity_api Jan 27, 2025
3 checks passed
@ychebotarev ychebotarev deleted the y_activity_type branch January 27, 2025 19:06
@@ -1768,8 +1766,18 @@ message UpdateActivityOptionsByIdRequest {
// Controls which fields from `activity_options` will be applied
google.protobuf.FieldMask update_mask = 7;

// Used to de-dupe requests
string request_id = 8;
// either activity id or activity type must be provided
Copy link
Member

@cretz cretz Jan 28, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

or type

This doesn't make sense in an UpdateActivityOptionsByIdRequest IMO. This API call as named only makes sense for a single activity by ID. If there are batch needs or a non-ID-specific update, maybe a different API call is needed or this one is improperly named.

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.

3 participants