Fix spec failure for table in gitab_main
What does this MR do and why?
This spec failed in https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab/-/jobs/6016420149, and the reason was traced to the fact that the gitlab_schema of vulnerabilities
table was changing from gitlab_main
to gitlab_main_cell
here.
Because of this reason, we are fixing this spec to remove references to gitlab_main
. This is because efforts are underway to classify tables as either gitlab_main_cell
or gitlab_main_clusterwide
, and eventually the gitlab_main
schema will cease to exist.
MR acceptance checklist
Please evaluate this MR against the MR acceptance checklist. It helps you analyze changes to reduce risks in quality, performance, reliability, security, and maintainability.
Screenshots or screen recordings
Screenshots are required for UI changes, and strongly recommended for all other merge requests.
Before | After |
---|---|
How to set up and validate locally
Numbered steps to set up and validate the change are strongly suggested.
Merge request reports
Activity
changed milestone to %16.9
added backend label
assigned to @manojmj
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 @jtapiab
(UTC-3, 4 hours behind author)
@lauraX
(UTC+1, same timezone as author)
Please check reviewer's status!
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
Dangerrequested review from @tigerwnz
- Resolved by Manoj M J
@manojmj - please see the following guidance and update this merge request.1 Error Please add typebug typefeature, or typemaintenance label to this merge request.
Thanks for the quick fix @manojmj!
requested review from @DylanGriffith and removed review request for @tigerwnz
- Resolved by Dylan Griffith
@tigerwnz
, thanks for approving this merge request.This is the first time the merge request has been approved. To ensure we don't only run predictive pipelines, and we don't break
master
, a new pipeline will be started shortly.Please wait for the pipeline to start before resolving this discussion and set auto-merge for the new pipeline. See merging a merge request for more details.
added pipeline:mr-approved label
added typemaintenance label
- Resolved by Dylan Griffith
removed review request for @DylanGriffith
added grouptenant scale label
added devopsdata stores sectioncore platform labels
revoked approvals from @tigerwnz by pushing to the branch
requested review from @DylanGriffith
- Resolved by Dylan Griffith
@manojmj I've only got non-blocking feedback so I'll go ahead and merge here.
enabled an automatic merge when all merge checks for 54b49810 pass
mentioned in commit 45120b7a
added workflowstaging-canary 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
added releasedcandidate label