Feature/handle duplicate records #347
Merged
Conversation
This file contains 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
|
Build succeeded. ✔️ ansible-galaxy-importer SUCCESS in 5m 01s |
tupyy
reviewed
Apr 21, 2024
|
Build succeeded. ✔️ ansible-galaxy-importer SUCCESS in 4m 49s |
tupyy
approved these changes
Apr 22, 2024
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
SUMMARY
When processing large number of records, ServiceNow returns duplicated records with the same 'sys_id' in the first fetch call. It causes 'sys_id' error when processing reference_dict where it tries to pop the same 'sys_id' twice.
ISSUE TYPE
COMPONENT NAME
plugins/inventory/now.py
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
No change to how the plugin is being run. The issue is in the returned data from ServiceNow. This change should handle the duplicate records without causing the plugin to fail with error. The duplicated records have the same sys_id, so they should be the same record. Therefore, it should be OK to process it twice.