- Queries
- All Stories
- Search
- Advanced Search
- Transactions
- Transaction Logs
Advanced Search
Apr 19 2021
rebase
rebased
rebased
The loading tasks created during this first listing were oneshot tasks. So they have been modified to recurring tasks with something like:
Doesn't this deserve a state-of-the-art kind of thing? Are there documentation material on the subject? How does other (big) cassandra users handle this?
The listing task has been disabled, I think because of failures in the last executions:
is there a grafana dashboard dedicated to this queue?
also: what about exports we provide on git annex?
do we also intent to have a takedown topic on kafka?
Apr 9 2021
Apr 8 2021
Just got this one below. Note that this occurred just when the replayer actually started to insert object in the storage (before that, since the start of the replayer process, only kafka scaffolding took place for quite some time, around 30mn!)
Apr 7 2021
looks like there is no revision with date or committer_date > 9999-12-31 in the main storage...
Apr 6 2021
fix commit message
In D5413#137649, @douardda wrote:In D5413#137363, @vlorentz wrote:Could you add a test for the storage? All other *_add have a journal test IIRC
let me check that
rebased
Add explicit checks for extid being written in the journal and split the revision in 2
In D5413#137363, @vlorentz wrote:Could you add a test for the storage? All other *_add have a journal test IIRC
In D5413#137370, @ardumont wrote:lgtm
(I would have made that 2 commits with each its own perimeter, 1 for the actual perimeter, 1 to refactor the test, but whatever)
Apr 2 2021
Currently, the mirror test session is running with:
easy fix: modify the replayer to ignore this 'metadata' column while inserting revisions
09:45 <+vlorentz> douardda: yes and the only way around it (short of dropping data) is T3089 09:46 -swhbot:#swh-devel- T3089 (submitter: vlorentz, owner: vlorentz, status: Open): Remove the 'metadata' column of the 'revision' table <https://forge.softwareheritage.org/T3089> 09:46 <+vlorentz> or switching to cassandra 09:46 <+vlorentz> the good news is, they couldn't be inserted in the storage either, so you can safely drop them for now
Apr 1 2021
Mar 31 2021
In D5387#136812, @vlorentz wrote:test coverage of the code touched by this diff isn't great
Mar 30 2021
In D5389#136825, @vlorentz wrote:Why .hex() everywhere? Does swh-provenance use hex strings internally?
Mar 29 2021
looks indeed reasonable (both the 1. point and the code) thanks
Mar 26 2021
rebase
rebase
rebased
apply vlorentz comments
Mar 25 2021
refactor a bit the test
Mar 24 2021
Add forgotten test data file CMDBTS.msgpack
apply aeviso comments and reorder (and fix) revisions
Mar 23 2021
Rebase and use test dataset from the CMDBTS git repo
Mar 18 2021
rebase and remove the dependency on pytz
LGTM, but I would have loved to see a test dedicated to branches (and filters) with non-ascii chars (ach time I see a <str>.encode() I expect the worst... )
Mar 17 2021
Can you add a line in the commit message explaining what this swh_authority_url config entry is for? Because il looks weird to add use a real URL as value in a docker test environment...
Mar 16 2021
Mar 15 2021
Otherwise LGTM. I'd really like a better commit message, and probably some documentation somewhere (in docs/ maybe?) explaining these 2 levels of metadata, especially documenting the second layer, since it's crafted by the deposit.