Skip to content

Conversation

@mifu67
Copy link
Contributor

@mifu67 mifu67 commented Oct 30, 2025

Trying again now that subscription processor code has removed references to AlertRule. Flags removed:

  • organizations:workflow-engine-process-metric-issue-workflows
  • organizations:workflow-engine-metric-alert-processing
  • organizations:workflow-engine-single-process-metric-issues

@mifu67 mifu67 requested review from a team as code owners October 30, 2025 23:30
@github-actions github-actions bot added the Scope: Backend Automatically applied to PRs that change backend components label Oct 30, 2025
Copy link
Contributor

@saponifi3d saponifi3d left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

lgtm, just the nit / ask for a jira ticket around the the AlertRuleDetector table.

Comment on lines +138 to +144
# temporarily fetch the alert rule ID from the detector ID
alert_rule_detector = AlertRuleDetector.objects.filter(
detector_id=open_period_identifier, alert_rule_id__isnull=False
).first()
if alert_rule_detector is not None:
# open_period_identifier is a metric detector ID -> get the alert rule ID
open_period_identifier = alert_rule_detector.alert_rule_id
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

is there a way we could update this to no longer rely on the AlertRuleDetector table (or the alert_rule_id?) as we're removing these processing flags, my hope is that as we remove the feature flags we're left with the desired end state implementation.

if we have to have the alert_rule_id for like charting things, then it'd help to have that listed out somewhere as they'll be important blockers to fix before we can cleanup too much code.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This is coming in my next PR 😅 doing a refactor so the charts use the open period serializer instead.

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Oct 30, 2025

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ All tests successful. No failed tests found.

Additional details and impacted files
@@             Coverage Diff             @@
##           master   #102456      +/-   ##
===========================================
+ Coverage   80.71%    80.80%   +0.08%     
===========================================
  Files        8826      8836      +10     
  Lines      390071    390791     +720     
  Branches    24799     24799              
===========================================
+ Hits       314863    315784     +921     
+ Misses      74857     74656     -201     
  Partials      351       351              

@mifu67
Copy link
Contributor Author

mifu67 commented Oct 31, 2025

Ugh, I think this is going to be tied up with removing the legacy actions code 🫠

Copy link
Member

@kcons kcons left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks reasonable to me.

@mifu67 mifu67 merged commit 5025068 into master Nov 5, 2025
68 checks passed
@mifu67 mifu67 deleted the mifu67/aci/remove-processing-ffs branch November 5, 2025 22:53
priscilawebdev pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Nov 6, 2025
Trying again now that subscription processor code has removed references
to AlertRule. Flags removed:
- `organizations:workflow-engine-process-metric-issue-workflows`
- `organizations:workflow-engine-metric-alert-processing`
- `organizations:workflow-engine-single-process-metric-issues`
Ahmed-Labs pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Nov 6, 2025
Trying again now that subscription processor code has removed references
to AlertRule. Flags removed:
- `organizations:workflow-engine-process-metric-issue-workflows`
- `organizations:workflow-engine-metric-alert-processing`
- `organizations:workflow-engine-single-process-metric-issues`
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

Scope: Backend Automatically applied to PRs that change backend components

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants