Processing out of order/offline entities by runId and runIndex #1148
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
ktuite
force-pushed
the
ktuite/entity_runs
branch
from
0f74e84
to
2f7a5d7
Compare
|
Closing this PR because we are going down a slightly different route and I've now pushed my updated approach. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Part of addressing getodk/central#669
This is a megabranch/work-in-progress (because of database migrations and naming related to openrosa spec).
It can handle 'runId' and 'runIndex' coming in within the
<entity>block in a submission and has a submission backlog for holding onto submissions that come in out of order.What has been done to verify that this works as intended?
Why is this the best possible solution? Were any other approaches considered?
How does this change affect users? Describe intentional changes to behavior and behavior that could have accidentally been affected by code changes. In other words, what are the regression risks?
Does this change require updates to the API documentation? If so, please update docs/api.yaml as part of this PR.
Before submitting this PR, please make sure you have:
make testand confirmed all checks still pass OR confirm CircleCI build passes