You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Just wanted to capture what seems to be an edge case from a slack conversation where two dynamic nodes spin up at the same time (same upstream node), and one of the dynamic wfs creates a set of signal and the other dynamic wf satisfies them. Maybe OP can provide more context as to why this data flow structure is necessary (why could these not have been combined into one dynamic wf for instance and the signal node removed), but in this particular case, it is possible of course that the latter workflow attempts to set signals that don't yet exist.
Are you sure this issue hasn't been raised already?
Yes
Have you read the Code of Conduct?
Yes
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
wild-endeavor
changed the title
[DevEx] Signal node ordering edge case.
[DevEx] Signal node ordering edge case
Nov 15, 2024
eapolinario
added
backlogged
For internal use. Reserved for contributor team workflow.
and removed
untriaged
This issues has not yet been looked at by the Maintainers
labels
Nov 21, 2024
Background
Just wanted to capture what seems to be an edge case from a slack conversation where two dynamic nodes spin up at the same time (same upstream node), and one of the dynamic wfs creates a set of signal and the other dynamic wf satisfies them. Maybe OP can provide more context as to why this data flow structure is necessary (why could these not have been combined into one dynamic wf for instance and the signal node removed), but in this particular case, it is possible of course that the latter workflow attempts to set signals that don't yet exist.
Are you sure this issue hasn't been raised already?
Have you read the Code of Conduct?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: