fix: update existing Lambda handler configuration - #2195
Open
Shubham-Padkonde wants to merge 1 commit into
Open
Shubham-Padkonde wants to merge 1 commit into
Shubham-Padkonde wants to merge 1 commit into
Conversation
This branch has not been deployed
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Issue #, if available: Addresses the stale Lambda handler configuration reported in #1566 (the final paragraph).
Description of changes:
When a function retains its deployed name but its handler moves from
app.workertochalicelib.workers.worker, deployment uploads the new code but does not update Lambda'sHandler. Invocations therefore continue looking for the old callable. Include the desired handler in the update plan and forward it toUpdateFunctionConfiguration. The optional client parameter preserves existing callers that omit a handler.Regression coverage checks moves into and out of a blueprint module, a callable rename with the same deployed function name, and the actual botocore request parameters. All four cases fail before this fix. Optional scalar configuration fields are collected together to stay within the project's complexity limit.
This addresses the handler-update problem only; blueprint middleware/app initialization discussed in the same issue remains separate.
Validation: full
make prcheckpasses on Python 3.11.15: 1,401 tests passed, 27 skipped, 94% coverage; flake8, pydocstyle, pylint, documentation link/HTML checks, and mypy (63 source files) pass. The focused planner/AWS-client suite passes 306 tests. No live AWS resources were created or modified; service calls use botocore stubs.Developed with Codex assistance; no independent human review is claimed.
By submitting this pull request, I confirm that my contribution is made under the terms of the Apache 2.0 license.