Validate Database/MultipleDatabases offenses in specs (ActiveRecord::Base)

added ci-decomposition-followup grouptenant scale labels

marked this issue as related to #359952 (closed)

Perhaps this can be a good one for @OmarQunsulGitlab to validate ? /cc @DylanGriffith

@tkuah as I understand this is ci-decomposition-followup so should not be as high priority as what @OmarQunsulGitlab is working on now which is #361603 (closed) .

@OmarQunsulGitlab this may be a good one to do in parallel with your other changes when waiting for reviews etc. and may expose you to some more lower level database connection logic that would be useful to understand.

@DylanGriffith sounds good, I will assign it to myself.

@tkuah can you elaborate more on the issue here, maybe with some example(s)? also, what a Real Problem can mean here?

do I understand correctly that we should check for all the offenses in the Excluded files, and aim to fix them all?

@OmarQunsulGitlab Sure.

For example, in spec/tasks/gitlab/backup_rake_spec.rb, we see :

allow(ActiveRecord::Base.connection).to receive(:reconnect!)

This could indicate that the code that this spec is testing is only reconnecting for the main connection. Should the ci connection be reconnected too ?

If it's a simple fix, feel free to fix. If not, please open issues and ping the relevant group for them to investigate.

If it's not a legitimate offense, add a rubocop:disable Databases/MultipleDatabases magic comment.

assigned to @OmarQunsulGitlab

Setting label(s) ~"Category:Sharding" devopsenablement sectionenablement based on groupsharding.

added Category:Cell devopssystems sectioncore platform labels

@tkuah, please can you add a type label to this issue to help with issue discovery in issue reports.

(improve this comment?)

added auto updated label

mentioned in issue #359952 (closed)

mentioned in commit 21bb3cda

mentioned in merge request !87654 (closed)

added workflowin dev label

added devopsdata stores label and removed devopssystems label

mentioned in commit 27b9de48

mentioned in commit 9a275040

mentioned in commit eff4a72b

mentioned in commit 16355f30

mentioned in commit 30d1638e

mentioned in commit 572a94cf

mentioned in commit cc1792ca

mentioned in commit 2de05c4c

added workflowin review label and removed workflowin dev label

changed milestone to %15.1

changed milestone to %15.2

changed milestone to %15.3

added missed:15.2 label

Setting label(s) ~"Category:Pods (formerly Sharding)" based on ~"group::pods".

@OmarQunsulGitlab @gitlabbarry Please add a type::xyz label to this issue. Thanks! /cc @nhxnguyen

added typemaintenance label

Setting label(s) ~"Category:Pods (formerly Sharding)" based on ~"group::pods".

changed milestone to %15.4

added missed:15.3 label

added to epic &6718 (closed)

added 1 deleted label

added workflowready for development label and removed workflowin review label

changed milestone to %15.5

added missed:15.4 label

changed milestone to %15.6

added missed:15.5 label

changed epic to &8438

marked this issue as related to #362341

@OmarQunsulGitlab I saw this brief conversation about this in the "Discussion about Decomposition for Self Managed Users and general Backlog clean up of Pods Issues" recording.

The intent is to find any actual problems (like backups not backing up the ci problem). Fixing any specs is secondary.

On a different note, would it be helpful to pair on this ?

I agree Even though I tried to find if there any other problems back then (like the backups), I am not sure if I oversaw any other big problems.

It would be great to pair on this. But I also suggest to split it into difference parts, to avoid losing focus and ending up with a big MR, like this draft MR.