Bust cache on article destroy instead of resave articles #1621 #1801
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
lightalloy
changed the title
lightalloy
commented
Feb 15, 2019
| article_ids.concat organization.article_ids | ||
| end | ||
| # perform busting cache in chunks in case there're a lot of articles | ||
| (article_ids.uniq.sort - [id]).each_slice(10) do |ids| |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Sorting here is just to be able to test, that the job is enqueued with the correct arguments (spec/models/article_destroy_spec.rb:24). The order of article_ids is not important. Sets are not allowed as job arguments.
If anyone has a better idea to remove sorting and still test, please, share.
Zhao-Andy
approved these changes
Feb 21, 2019
pr-triage
bot
added
PR: reviewed-approved
benhalpern
approved these changes
Feb 24, 2019
pr-triage
bot
added
PR: merged
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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 type of PR is this? (check all applicable)
Description
In the current implementation, when an article is destroyed, all the "sibling" articles of the (destroyed) article organization are resaved. Resaving triggers several callbacks, which create a lot of delayed_jobs. That takes plenty of time and resources. There's no need to resave articles, it's enough to bust their cache.
What happens on article destroy after the refactoring:
Related Tickets & Documents
#1621
Not directly related to the ticket (not fixing errors), but contains refactoring for the related code.