purge functionality based on blockcount and time #362
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
Signed-off-by: Anusha <anu.vp.nair@gmail.com>
Comment on lines
+429
to
+435
| case purge_mode[0]: { | ||
| response = await this.persistence. | ||
| getCrudService(). | ||
| deleteOldData(channel_genesis_hash, network_id, daysToPurge); | ||
| break; | ||
| } | ||
| case purge_mode[1]: { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Can you check if we can use the enums here instead of purge_mode[0] and purge_mode[1]
Comment on lines
+22
to
+24
| export enum PurgeModes { | ||
| 'TIME', | ||
| 'BLOCKCOUNT' |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
How about having the Enums like this
PurgeModes {
TIME = "TIME"
}
| "profile": "./connection-profile/test-network.json" | ||
| "profile": "./connection-profile/test-network.json", | ||
| "blockCount": 5, | ||
| "purgeMode":"NONE", |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I assume we will now have the following purgemode NONE, TIME,BLOCKCOUNT, are we also handling the NONE case as well (which means no purge is needed).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
yes, we are handling the NONE case(* No purge) too.
| @@ -18,3 +18,8 @@ export const fabric = { | |||
| NOTITY_TYPE_CLIENTERROR: '6' | |||
| } | |||
| }; | |||
|
|
|||
| export enum PurgeModes { | |||
| 'TIME', | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
If we have the NONE as purge mode, then we need to handle that case, can you check this case once.
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
What this PR does / why we need it:
Now explorer database is saving each transaction that is committed on to the ledger making replica copies of ledger. When number of transactions increases there is a chance of outage of postgres database. In order to address this we would keep only the recent data in database and provide a query back mechanism to read back from the blockchain for any of the purged data.
Implementation
Based on BLOCKCOUNT
Based on TIME
We can set the purgeMode attribute in config.json file and according to the purge mode, it enables purging from database.
If it is based on blockcount (mention the number of blocks as blockCount value in config.json) ,it will retain those many blocks in the database and the rest of the records would be purged.
If it is based on time (mention the number of days as daysToPurge value in config.json) then it will keep those many days of records in the database according to the daystoPurge provided in the config file.
If the purgeMode attribute is set to "NONE", then purging won't happen and it will retain the complete data as of ledger.
All the audit records of deletion is saved to explorer_audit_table which is further used for the sync process.
Why is this needed?
Explorer creates duplicate copy of complete ledger data in postgres which can be of larger number and can lead to database storage outage.
Which issue(s) this PR fixes:
Fixes #332
Special notes for your reviewer:
Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?
Additional documentation, usage docs, etc.: