Fix Windows service startup timeout by calling set_service_running()

[Hmnt39]

Added handle.set_service_running() call to report service status to Windows Service Control Manager, preventing the service from timing out in starting state. Updated test case to verify the method is called during service initialization.

[gemini-code-assist]

Summary of Changes

Hello @Hmnt39, I'm Gemini Code Assist¹! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed!

This pull request addresses a critical issue where Windows services could time out during their startup phase, leading to premature termination. The core change involves ensuring that the service explicitly reports its running status to the Windows Service Control Manager early in its initialization, thereby preventing the default timeout mechanism from interfering. This enhancement improves the reliability and stability of services deployed on Windows environments.

Highlights

• Windows Service Startup Fix: Implemented a fix to prevent Windows services from timing out during startup by explicitly calling handle.set_service_running() to report the service status to the Windows Service Control Manager.
• Test Case Update: Updated an existing test case to include a verification that handle.set_service_running() is called during service initialization, ensuring the fix is properly tested.
• Version Bump: The package version has been incremented from 7.11.2 to 7.11.3.
• Changelog Entry: Added a changelog entry for version 7.11.3 detailing the fix for the Windows service startup timeout.

🧠 New Feature in Public Preview: You can now enable Memory to help Gemini Code Assist learn from your team's feedback. This makes future code reviews more consistent and personalized to your project's style. Click here to enable Memory in your admin console.

Using Gemini Code Assist

The full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips.

Invoking Gemini

You can request assistance from Gemini at any point by creating a comment using either /gemini <command> or @gemini-code-assist <command>. Below is a summary of the supported commands on the current page.

Feature	Command	Description
Code Review	/gemini review	Performs a code review for the current pull request in its current state.
Pull Request Summary	/gemini summary	Provides a summary of the current pull request in its current state.
Comment	@gemini-code-assist	Responds in comments when explicitly tagged, both in pull request comments and review comments.
Help	/gemini help	Displays a list of available commands.

Customization

To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a .gemini/ folder in the base of the repository. Detailed instructions can be found here.

Limitations & Feedback

Gemini Code Assist may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments. If you're interested in giving your feedback about your experience with Gemini Code Assist for Github and other Google products, sign up here.

You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with the Gemini Code Assist IDE Extension.

Footnotes

1. Review the Privacy Notices, Generative AI Prohibited Use Policy, Terms of Service, and learn how to configure Gemini Code Assist in GitHub here. Gemini can make mistakes, so double check it and use code with caution. ↩

[gemini-code-assist]

Code Review

This pull request correctly addresses a timeout issue for Windows services by calling handle.set_service_running() at the beginning of the service's lifecycle. This prevents the Windows Service Control Manager from terminating the service for taking too long to start. The change is implemented correctly in cognite/extractorutils/unstable/core/runtime.py, and the corresponding test in tests/test_unstable/test_runtime.py has been updated to verify this new behavior. The version updates and changelog entry are also appropriate. The changes are solid and I have no further feedback.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 50.00000% with 1 line in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 81.02%. Comparing base (e6df6dc) to head (b64fd0b).
⚠️ Report is 1 commits behind head on master.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
cognite/extractorutils/unstable/core/runtime.py	0.00%	1 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master     #500      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   81.04%   81.02%   -0.02%     
==========================================
  Files          43       43              
  Lines        4210     4211       +1     
==========================================
  Hits         3412     3412              
- Misses        798      799       +1     

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
cognite/extractorutils/__init__.py	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
cognite/extractorutils/unstable/core/runtime.py	70.46% <0.00%> (-0.30%)	⬇️

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

[dmivankov]

🦄