✨ Source Slack: Fix cursor granularity for the channel_messages stream
#38619
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
|
The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for Git ↗︎ 1 Ignored Deployment
|
octavia-squidington-iii
added
area/connectors
octavia-squidington-iii
added
the
area/documentation
bazarnov
approved these changes
May 24, 2024
tolik0
deleted the
tolik0/source-slack/channel-messages-fix-cursor-granularity
branch
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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
Fix cursor granularity for the
Channel Messagesstream.How
In the previous version, the cursor granularity (the step between slices) was 10 days, which could result in some records being missed. This update changes the granularity to 1 second, as the cursor value used in the request is in seconds.
User Impact
The change ensures that no records are missed by improving the precision of the cursor.
Can this PR be safely reverted and rolled back?