Skip to content

feat(settings): combine manual routing and sticky thresholds#675

Closed
Komzpa wants to merge 16 commits into
Soju06:mainfrom
Komzpa:feature/manual-routing-sticky-thresholds-20260516
Closed

feat(settings): combine manual routing and sticky thresholds#675
Komzpa wants to merge 16 commits into
Soju06:mainfrom
Komzpa:feature/manual-routing-sticky-thresholds-20260516

Conversation

@Komzpa
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

@Komzpa Komzpa commented May 16, 2026

Summary

Supersedes #553 and #659 once this replacement passes review/CI.

Validation

  • uv run codex-lb-db --db-url sqlite+aiosqlite:////tmp/codex-lb-553-659.db upgrade head
  • uv run codex-lb-db --db-url sqlite+aiosqlite:////tmp/codex-lb-553-659.db check
  • uv run pytest -q -ra tests/integration/test_settings_api.py tests/integration/test_settings_sticky_thresholds_api.py tests/unit/test_load_balancer.py tests/unit/test_select_with_stickiness.py tests/unit/test_account_mappers.py
  • uv run ruff check app/modules/proxy/load_balancer.py app/modules/settings/api.py app/db/models.py tests/integration/test_settings_api.py tests/integration/test_settings_sticky_thresholds_api.py tests/unit/test_load_balancer.py tests/unit/test_select_with_stickiness.py tests/unit/test_account_mappers.py
  • uv run ruff format --check app/modules/proxy/load_balancer.py app/modules/settings/api.py app/db/models.py tests/integration/test_settings_api.py tests/integration/test_settings_sticky_thresholds_api.py
  • uv run ty check app/modules/proxy/load_balancer.py app/modules/settings/api.py app/db/models.py

@Komzpa
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator Author

Komzpa commented May 16, 2026

@codex review

@chatgpt-codex-connector
Copy link
Copy Markdown

Codex Review: Didn't find any major issues. Another round soon, please!

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

  • Open a pull request for review
  • Mark a draft as ready
  • Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

@Komzpa Komzpa added 🤖 codex: ok [@codex review] says no issues found. and removed 🤖 codex: ok [@codex review] says no issues found. labels May 16, 2026
@Komzpa
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator Author

Komzpa commented May 16, 2026

@codex review

@Komzpa Komzpa force-pushed the feature/manual-routing-sticky-thresholds-20260516 branch from 95d9a3c to dbab779 Compare May 16, 2026 11:08
@chatgpt-codex-connector
Copy link
Copy Markdown

Codex Review: Didn't find any major issues. You're on a roll.

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

  • Open a pull request for review
  • Mark a draft as ready
  • Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

@Komzpa Komzpa added the 🤖 codex: ok [@codex review] says no issues found. label May 16, 2026
@Komzpa
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator Author

Komzpa commented May 17, 2026

Closing this combined replacement in favor of the split review path.

#675 recombines #553 and #659 into one broad branch. The current tracker and maintainer guidance are using reviewable slices instead:

Keeping this open as "deferred" makes the queue ambiguous without adding a separate review unit. If a merge-head-only follow-up is still needed after the split PRs land, it should be a small fresh PR against the accepted heads, not this combined branch.

@Komzpa Komzpa closed this May 17, 2026
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

🤖 codex: ok [@codex review] says no issues found.

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant