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

Populate evaluation history tables with old evaluations #4065

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Aug 9, 2024

Conversation

dmjb
Copy link
Contributor

@dmjb dmjb commented Aug 2, 2024

In order to replace the old rule status tables, we need to populate the evaluation history tables with the statuses of rule evaluations which happened prior to the introduction of the new tables. Once this migration is complete, it will be possible to change the existing profile and rule queries to use the evaluation history tables instead of the old rule evaluation/details tables.

Migration validated locally.

Summary

Provide a brief overview of the changes and the issue being addressed.
Explain the rationale and any background necessary for understanding the changes.
List dependencies required by this change, if any.

Fixes #(related issue)

Change Type

Mark the type of change your PR introduces:

  • Bug fix (resolves an issue without affecting existing features)
  • Feature (adds new functionality without breaking changes)
  • Breaking change (may impact existing functionalities or require documentation updates)
  • Documentation (updates or additions to documentation)
  • Refactoring or test improvements (no bug fixes or new functionality)

Testing

Outline how the changes were tested, including steps to reproduce and any relevant configurations.
Attach screenshots if helpful.

Review Checklist:

  • Reviewed my own code for quality and clarity.
  • Added comments to complex or tricky code sections.
  • Updated any affected documentation.
  • Included tests that validate the fix or feature.
  • Checked that related changes are merged.

@coveralls
Copy link

coveralls commented Aug 2, 2024

Coverage Status

coverage: 53.844%. remained the same
when pulling 7787fcf on migrate-rule-evaluations
into 239d6b3 on main.

@dmjb dmjb marked this pull request as ready for review August 6, 2024 10:17
@dmjb dmjb requested a review from a team as a code owner August 6, 2024 10:17
@dmjb dmjb marked this pull request as draft August 6, 2024 13:49
@dmjb dmjb marked this pull request as ready for review August 7, 2024 14:52
@dmjb dmjb marked this pull request as draft August 7, 2024 16:45
@dmjb dmjb marked this pull request as ready for review August 8, 2024 12:09
@dmjb dmjb force-pushed the migrate-rule-evaluations branch 2 times, most recently from 9a4de7b to 695d7f1 Compare August 8, 2024 12:11
JAORMX
JAORMX previously approved these changes Aug 8, 2024
In order to replace the old rule status tables, we need to populate the
evaluation history tables with the statuses of rule evaluations which happened
prior to the introduction of the new tables. Once this migration is complete,
it will be possible to change the existing profile and rule queries to use the
evaluation history tables instead of the old rule evaluation/details tables.

Migration validated locally.
@dmjb dmjb merged commit 5e7ff4b into main Aug 9, 2024
22 checks passed
@dmjb dmjb deleted the migrate-rule-evaluations branch August 9, 2024 11:17
dmjb added a commit that referenced this pull request Aug 9, 2024
This reverts commit 5e7ff4b.

Encountered an issue in staging. Reverting until we can determine the
cause of the problem.
dmjb added a commit that referenced this pull request Aug 9, 2024
…" (#4110)

This reverts commit 5e7ff4b.

Encountered an issue in staging. Reverting until we can determine the
cause of the problem.
dmjb added a commit that referenced this pull request Aug 13, 2024
Refer to PR #4065 for a description of the change. This was merged in
but had to be rolled back due to a bug. That bug was fixed in PR #4124.
As part of this roll out. Part of migration script 88 needs to be
repeated to fix any rows affected by that bug before applying it.
@dmjb dmjb mentioned this pull request Aug 13, 2024
10 tasks
dmjb added a commit that referenced this pull request Aug 14, 2024
Refer to PR #4065 for a description of the change. This was merged in
but had to be rolled back due to a bug. That bug was fixed in PR #4124.
As part of this roll out. Part of migration script 88 needs to be
repeated to fix any rows affected by that bug before applying it.
dmjb added a commit that referenced this pull request Aug 14, 2024
Refer to PR #4065 for a description of the change. This was merged in
but had to be rolled back due to a bug. That bug was fixed in PR #4124.
As part of this roll out. Part of migration script 88 needs to be
repeated to fix any rows affected by that bug before applying it.
psekar pushed a commit to tinytrail/minder that referenced this pull request Aug 15, 2024
Refer to PR mindersec#4065 for a description of the change. This was merged in
but had to be rolled back due to a bug. That bug was fixed in PR mindersec#4124.
As part of this roll out. Part of migration script 88 needs to be
repeated to fix any rows affected by that bug before applying it.
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.

3 participants