X Tutup
The Wayback Machine - https://web.archive.org/web/20201123072458/https://github.com/apache/syncope/pull/213
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

Fog catcher: Propagation task executions and no-SQL persistence #213

Open
wants to merge 8 commits into
base: 2_1_X
from

Conversation

@andrea-patricelli
Copy link
Contributor

@andrea-patricelli andrea-patricelli commented Sep 8, 2020

This is the fog-catcher implementation for "Propagation task executions and no-SQL persistence", that includes:

  • Refactoring of persistence layer to have a table for each task type (push, pull, propagation, notification, sched) with related SQL script to upgrade from previous versions.
  • Persistence of PropagationTasks on Elasticsearch as per any objects.
@andrea-patricelli andrea-patricelli requested a review from ilgrosso Sep 8, 2020
Copy link
Member

@ilgrosso ilgrosso left a comment

Besides the comments I have added, there are two additional things to cover:

  1. run the tests for core/persistence-jpa-json will likely lead to failures, as the MasterContent.xml there was not updated
  2. at least a test case should be added in ElasticSearchITCase to cover the new features
append(" t WHERE ");
if (type == TaskType.SCHEDULED) {
if (SchedTask.class.isAssignableFrom(reference)) {

This comment has been minimized.

@ilgrosso

ilgrosso Sep 9, 2020
Member

This is not correct, as type == TaskType.SCHEDULE used to match only SchedTask while now this is also matching PushTask, PullTask and so on.

This comment has been minimized.

@andrea-patricelli

andrea-patricelli Sep 22, 2020
Author Contributor

Ok, going to replace with JPASchedTask

@@ -42,6 +43,7 @@
* The referred task.
*/
@ManyToOne(optional = false)
@JoinColumn(name = "task_id", nullable = false)

This comment has been minimized.

@ilgrosso

ilgrosso Sep 9, 2020
Member

Is this @JoinColumn annotation really needed? What if you remove it?

This comment has been minimized.

@andrea-patricelli

andrea-patricelli Oct 6, 2020
Author Contributor

Yes, this is needed. Without this the tests org.apache.syncope.core.persistence.jpa.outer.TaskTest are going to fail with errors like Column "TASKEXEC.TASK_ID" not found;.

fit/console-reference/pom.xml Show resolved Hide resolved
fit/core-reference/pom.xml Show resolved Hide resolved
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Linked issues

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

2 participants
You can’t perform that action at this time.
X Tutup