Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Write to both DynamoDB and RDS #1064

Merged
merged 92 commits into from
Dec 6, 2024
Merged

Write to both DynamoDB and RDS #1064

merged 92 commits into from
Dec 6, 2024

Conversation

MinhxNguyen7
Copy link
Member

Needed to recreate because the other one had to be reset because it broke prod

Refer to #993

@MinhxNguyen7 MinhxNguyen7 self-assigned this Dec 6, 2024
@MinhxNguyen7
Copy link
Member Author

MinhxNguyen7 commented Dec 6, 2024

I think (part of) the problem is because we pass the USERDATA_TABLE_NAME by getting it from the DDB that we create in the stack, and that isn't part of the environment variables, which is parsed by the migration script. That's why the deployment works, but the migration doesn't.

Where it's passed in.
image

We should be able to fix this by either not parsing it or hard-coding the table name as a repository/environment variable, or we can have a different env-var schema.

@MinhxNguyen7
Copy link
Member Author

I made different envs for RDS and DDB, which seems to have worked. I've reverted the application of the migration in staging, since multiple PRs that change the DB would break migrations.

@MinhxNguyen7 MinhxNguyen7 marked this pull request as ready for review December 6, 2024 06:39
@MinhxNguyen7 MinhxNguyen7 merged commit 6dd31d0 into main Dec 6, 2024
3 of 5 checks passed
@MinhxNguyen7 MinhxNguyen7 mentioned this pull request Dec 6, 2024
4 tasks
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.

5 participants