try grabbing query files from artifacts directory

[pb82]

SUMMARY

Store queries discovered during job execution.

ISSUE TYPE

• New or Enhanced Feature

COMPONENT NAME

• API

AWX VERSION

devel

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

[AlanCoding]

#15754 should be ready to create a hook for further testing in a TODO comment marked there.

[AlanCoding]

I've become concerned with this approach, and will file a followup issue. The planned schema will have an unbounded list of modules, which I expect to get extremely long and repetitive.

We've gotten burned in the past by storing large JSON content inside of job templates and jobs, because this affects query performance and list view loading performance. I think this applies to this case.

The best place to put this would be into a new model, say an internal CollectionVersion model which is unique to the FQCN and version. This would then be addressable from the installed_collections field already on the model.

[pb82]

@AlanCoding I can see the installed_collections field on the unified jobs model, which is also a JSON field. Does this also include the collection version? I've added a collections/requirements.yml file to my project and ran a job, but the field always seems to be empty, even though the collection got installed. But probably an issue on my end.

The new table could look like this:

fqcn	collection_version	event_query
foo.bar	1.0.0	dict[module name]query

FQCN and collection_version would form the primary key. Does that look good to you? We would also need to parse the query file once we receive it. And we can skip updating the table if there is already a query for a given collection version.

[AlanCoding]

I've added a collections/requirements.yml file to my project and ran a job, but the field always seems to be empty

Presumably because of ansible/ansible-runner#1273

My stance is that we should send back the collection data by the same mechanism as the event_query data.

But I think we should store them in different locations, because IMO the event_query data will likely be too much to put on the job record.

[sonarqubecloud]

Quality Gate passed

Issues
0 New issues
0 Accepted issues

Measures
0 Security Hotspots
0.0% Coverage on New Code
0.0% Duplication on New Code

See analysis details on SonarQube Cloud