Skip to content

Comments

6510 repeated ingests#6663

Merged
djbrooke merged 7 commits intodevelopfrom
6510-repeated-ingests
Feb 21, 2020
Merged

6510 repeated ingests#6663
djbrooke merged 7 commits intodevelopfrom
6510-repeated-ingests

Conversation

@landreev
Copy link
Contributor

@landreev landreev commented Feb 20, 2020

What this PR does / why we need it:
No application code in this PR. Only documentation and a diagnostic tool to be sent out to the remote installations, to check if their databases have been affected by these issues.

The release note in this PR supercedes the release note added in #6612 (removed in this PR).
Same for the "pre-release note" - we are only sending out ONE note/one diagnostics script to the remote installations; which checks for both this issue, #6510 and #6525
Which issue(s) this PR closes:

Closes #6510

Special notes for your reviewer:

Suggestions on how to test this:
testing the diagnostic script against the copy of the prod. db on vm5 should confirm that neither issue is present; since our database has already been cleaned up.
If we have an older (2+ months) snapshot sitting around, a more thorough test could be to run it against that, to confirm that it actually finds the issues, when present.

Does this PR introduce a user interface change?:

Is there a release notes update needed for this change?:

Additional documentation:

(this is a *compbined* script for BOTH #6510 and #6522!)
This (and the proper release note) SUPERCEDES what was in PR #6522!
i.e. we are sending out only ONE note, not TWO, there's only one
script to run, etc.
(ref. #6510)
@coveralls
Copy link

coveralls commented Feb 20, 2020

Coverage Status

Coverage remained the same at 19.471% when pulling b710561 on 6510-repeated-ingests into 638ca77 on develop.

Copy link
Contributor

@sekmiller sekmiller left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I put my comment on the wrong PR. Looks good but I don't have anything locally to get extensive results from the queries.

@djbrooke
Copy link
Contributor

Thanks @sekmiller for the review. I have some small text changes that I'll discuss with @landreev and then we can send this out. I'll assign to myself for now and Leonid and I can talk after standup.

@djbrooke djbrooke self-assigned this Feb 21, 2020
@djbrooke djbrooke merged commit 826e77f into develop Feb 21, 2020
@djbrooke djbrooke deleted the 6510-repeated-ingests branch February 21, 2020 18:38
@djbrooke djbrooke added this to the 4.20 milestone Feb 21, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Ingest: Multiple (repeated) ingests of tabular data files

4 participants