-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 39
DOCSP 28174 adding info to commit page #222
Conversation
ajhuh-mdb
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM with one suggestion!
source/reference/api/commit.txt
Outdated
| Description | ||
| ----------- | ||
|
|
||
| Commits the synchronization operation to the destination cluster. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
[suggestion] It looks like the first half of the new sentence is saying virtually the same thing as the first sentence that's already here. Maybe we can just merge these two?
| Commits the synchronization operation to the destination cluster. | |
| Finalizes the synchronization operation between the source and destination clusters. ``commit``stops continuous... |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
My only hesitation here is that the the other endpoints use the endpoint name to describe the definition of the endpoint behavior. I do like the idea of combining the sentences and using "finalize" rather than "commit" but just wanted to check in re consistency
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Gotcha, that makes sense! I think the main concern is that the original JIRA ticket mentions that the "commit" language is what was causing confusion with the definition in the first place, so I think that could warrant overriding consistency in favor of clarity.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Sounds good, just made the change!
FGasper
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Everything here is correct.
I wasn’t sure if we want to explain more of what happens in a commit—e.g., indexes become unique-ified, collection caps are reduced to production levels, etc.—but TBH I don’t know how much of that we consider to be implementation.
I’ll ping the team.
|
Hi @FGasper ! I wanted to follow up on this and see if I should add anything else? |
| * - :ref:`Capped Collections <c2c-dr-capped-collections>` | ||
| - ``commit`` resets the required maximum size of capped collections | ||
| which ``mongosync`` set to the maximum allowable size on the | ||
| destination cluster. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Does this table duplicate the information in the disaster-recovery page?
If so, that seems like additional overhead and opportunity for confusion/inaccuracy, if those 2 pages now have to be kept manually in sync.
Is it possible to write the table out to a file, then include it separately? Maybe using rST’s include directive?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The information in the commit table and the disaster recovery table is similar but has different use cases which is why I hesitate to make make them identical with an include file. For the disaster recovery page, the user needs to know which commands to use (for example, use the collMod command to set expireAfterSeconds to the desired value) to manually take action while the commit table does not need to provide that information. Because the disaster recovery table needs to include instructions on how to manually reset the changes as opposed to the commit table which is just describes how things happen automatically, I would be in favor of leaving the two tables separate.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
That makes sense. Thanks!
FGasper
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM. Thanks!
* DOCSP-28714 clarifying commit * DOCSP-28174 adding commit information * DOCSP-28174 adding commit information * DOCSP-28174 copy edits * DOCSP-28174 copy edits * DOCSP-28174 adding commit behavior table * DOCSP-28174 adding commit behavior table * DOCSP-28174 adding commit behavior table * DOCSP-28174 adding commit behavior table * DOCSP-28174 updating disaster recovery
* DOCSP 28174 adding info to commit page (#222) * DOCSP-28714 clarifying commit * DOCSP-28174 adding commit information * DOCSP-28174 adding commit information * DOCSP-28174 copy edits * DOCSP-28174 copy edits * DOCSP-28174 adding commit behavior table * DOCSP-28174 adding commit behavior table * DOCSP-28174 adding commit behavior table * DOCSP-28174 adding commit behavior table * DOCSP-28174 updating disaster recovery * DOCSP-28174-v1.7-backport removing capped collections reference
DESCRIPTION
adding information to the commit page to clarify behavior
STAGING
https://preview-mongodbltranmdb2.gatsbyjs.io/cluster-sync/DOCSP-28174/reference/api/commit/
JIRA
https://jira.mongodb.org/browse/DOCSP-28174
BUILD LOG
https://workerpool-boxgs.mongodbstitch.com/pages/job.html?collName=queue&jobId=6579e76f7a5cb5fef5c7c6c4
Self-Review Checklist
External Review Requirements
What's expected of an external reviewer?