GitHub importer: Fallback to DB read if `MilestoneFinder` has no-cache

What does this MR do and why?

Based on the #427498 (closed), we're introducing the fallback to DB mechanism.

Similar to: Falling back to getting from db and recaching w... (!133914 - merged)

Screenshots or screen recordings

N/A

How to set up and validate locally

There are no changes, but we could take a look into: !133914 (merged)

And play with the console.

MR acceptance checklist

This checklist encourages us to confirm any changes have been analyzed to reduce risks in quality, performance, reliability, security, and maintainability.

• I have evaluated the MR acceptance checklist for this MR.

Related to #427498 (closed)

changed milestone to %16.6

added Category:Importers Deliverable Importer:GitHub backend devopsmanage groupimport and integrate milestonep2 quad-planningcomplete-no-action sectiondev typemaintenance workflowready for development labels

assigned to @bmarjanovic

added workflowin dev label and removed workflowready for development label

added 1 commit

• 204d10b0 - Falling back to getting from db and recaching when cache is missing

Compare with previous version

	1 Message
	CHANGELOG missing: If this merge request needs a changelog entry, add the Changelog trailer to the commit message you want to add to the changelog. If this merge request doesn't need a CHANGELOG entry, feel free to ignore this message.

Reviewer roulette

Changes that require review have been detected!

Please refer to the table below for assigning reviewers and maintainers suggested by Danger in the specified category:

Category	Reviewer	Maintainer
backend	@mokhax (UTC-6, 8 hours behind author)	@sgarg_gitlab (UTC+5.5, 3.5 hours ahead of author)

Please check reviewer's status!

• Reviewer is available!
• Reviewer is unavailable!

Feel free to override these selections if you think someone else would be better-suited or use the GitLab Review Workload Dashboard to find other available reviewers.

To read more on how to use the reviewer roulette, please take a look at the Engineering workflow and code review guidelines. Please consider assigning a reviewer or maintainer who is a domain expert in the area of the merge request.

Once you've decided who will review this merge request, assign them as a reviewer! Danger does not automatically notify them for you.

If needed, you can retry the danger-review job that generated this comment.

Generated by Danger

Allure report

allure-report-publisher generated test report!

e2e-test-on-gdk: test report for 8eeed335

expand test summary

+------------------------------------------------------------------+
|                          suites summary                          |
+-------------+--------+--------+---------+-------+-------+--------+
|             | passed | failed | skipped | flaky | total | result |
+-------------+--------+--------+---------+-------+-------+--------+
| Create      | 32     | 0      | 5       | 0     | 37    | ✅     |
| Govern      | 42     | 0      | 3       | 0     | 45    | ✅     |
| Plan        | 51     | 0      | 0       | 0     | 51    | ✅     |
| Verify      | 20     | 0      | 0       | 0     | 20    | ✅     |
| Data Stores | 20     | 0      | 0       | 0     | 20    | ✅     |
| Manage      | 0      | 0      | 1       | 0     | 1     | ➖     |
+-------------+--------+--------+---------+-------+-------+--------+
| Total       | 165    | 0      | 9       | 0     | 174   | ✅     |
+-------------+--------+--------+---------+-------+-------+--------+

e2e-package-and-test: test report for 8eeed335

expand test summary

+-------------------------------------------------------------+
|                       suites summary                        |
+--------+--------+--------+---------+-------+-------+--------+
|        | passed | failed | skipped | flaky | total | result |
+--------+--------+--------+---------+-------+-------+--------+
| Manage | 40     | 0      | 10      | 2     | 50    | ❗     |
| Create | 130    | 0      | 40      | 0     | 170   | ✅     |
+--------+--------+--------+---------+-------+-------+--------+
| Total  | 170    | 0      | 50      | 2     | 220   | ❗     |
+--------+--------+--------+---------+-------+-------+--------+

Hey @maddievn

Could you please give the initial review here?

requested review from @maddievn

added 1 commit

• 41bbcbcd - Add additional spec

Compare with previous version

changed the description

added workflowin review label and removed workflowin dev label

Nice stuff @bmarjanovic this makes sense to me. I left a few comments

removed review request for @maddievn

mentioned in merge request !134986 (merged)

added 1 commit

• 8eeed335 - Apply reviewer's feedback

Compare with previous version

requested review from @maddievn

approved this merge request

requested review from @rodrigo.tomonari

@maddievn, thanks for approving this merge request.

This is the first time the merge request has been approved. To ensure full test coverage, a new pipeline will be started shortly.

For more info, please refer to the following links:

• rspec predictive jobs
• jest predictive jobs
• merging a merge request.

added pipeline:mr-approved label

@bmarjanovic Some end-to-end (E2E) tests should run based on the stage label.

Please start the trigger-omnibus-and-follow-up-e2e job in the qa stage and ensure tests in the follow-up-e2e:package-and-test-ee pipeline pass before this MR is merged. (E2E tests are computationally intensive and don't run automatically for every push/rebase, so we ask you to run this job manually at least once.)

To run all E2E tests, apply the pipeline:run-all-e2e label and run a new pipeline.

E2E test jobs are allowed to fail due to flakiness. See current failures at the latest pipeline triage issue.

Once done, apply the emoji on this comment.

Team members only: for any questions or help, reach out on the internal #quality Slack channel.

approved this merge request

resolved all threads

enabled an automatic merge when the pipeline for 31236a8a succeeds

merged

mentioned in commit 6fef733c

added workflowstaging-canary label and removed workflowin review label

added workflowcanary label and removed workflowstaging-canary label

added workflowstaging label and removed workflowcanary label

added workflowproduction label and removed workflowstaging label

added workflowpost-deploy-db-staging label and removed workflowproduction label

added workflowpost-deploy-db-production label and removed workflowpost-deploy-db-staging label

mentioned in issue #427498 (closed)

added releasedcandidate label