Shard name vs. Shard updates, general tech debt cleanup
requested to merge 4957-projectsyncworker-should-skip-projects-that-have-a-broken-gitaly-shard-3 into master
What does this MR do?
- Fixes a potential time difference race condition
- Increases test coverage
- Explicitly refer to shard names as
shard_names
where it's a String vs. and actual shard object - Improve readability of how of
healthy_shard_names
works
Are there points in the code the reviewer needs to double check?
N/A
Why was this MR needed?
Technical debt / tidy up
Screenshots (if relevant)
N/A
Does this MR meet the acceptance criteria?
[ ] Changelog entry added, if necessary[ ] Documentation created/updated[ ] API support added-
Tests added for this feature/bug - Review
[ ] Has been reviewed by UX[ ] Has been reviewed by Frontend-
Has been reviewed by Backend [ ] Has been reviewed by Database
[ ] EE specific content should be in the top level/ee
folder-
Conform by the merge request performance guides -
Conform by the style guides -
Squashed related commits together [ ] Internationalization required/considered[ ] If paid feature, have we considered GitLab.com plan and how it works for groups and is there a design for promoting it to users who aren't on the correct plan-
End-to-end tests pass ( package-qa
manual pipeline job)
What are the relevant issue numbers?
Closes #4957 (closed)
Edited by Nick Thomas