Bug 1668511 Comment 2 Edit History

Note: The actual edited comment in the bug view page will always show the original commenter’s name and original timestamp.

I've tested this on `treeherder-stage` & `treeherder-prototype` & it worked OK without any problems. However, I've just realized the PR is a bit risky.
It's *too* eager to remove expired data. I mean: if the data is stale for more than an hour, it deletes it.

In the long term, if some extra buggy filter clauses are added [here](https://github.com/mozilla/treeherder/pull/6786/files#diff-fa20070e36ceef4e935c36cbeaee7b2b3a20766add95dfbd586baf998f45c4c6R146-R153), we risk deleting all alert summaries older than an hour.
Perf sheriffing would run into chaos for possibly 2 weeks (it would be basically blind).

I'd rather revert this from master & increase the essential filter condition from `created__lt=one_hour_ago` to `created__lt=one_year_ago`.
It will make it much more bug tolerant & still expire stale summaries. Perf sheriffs really don't care about perf data older than 1 year.

Sarah, could you revert [PR 6786](https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/attachment.cgi?id=9178972) so I can make it safer?
I've tested this on `treeherder-stage` & `treeherder-prototype` & it worked OK, without any problems. However, I've just realized the PR is a bit risky.
It's *too* eager to remove expired data. I mean: if the data is stale for more than an hour, it deletes it.

In the long term, if some extra buggy filter clauses are added [here](https://github.com/mozilla/treeherder/pull/6786/files#diff-fa20070e36ceef4e935c36cbeaee7b2b3a20766add95dfbd586baf998f45c4c6R146-R153), we risk deleting all alert summaries older than an hour.
Perf sheriffing would run into chaos for possibly 2 weeks (it would be basically blind).

I'd rather revert this from master & increase the essential filter condition from `created__lt=one_hour_ago` to `created__lt=one_year_ago`.
It will make it much more bug tolerant & still expire stale summaries. Perf sheriffs really don't care about perf data older than 1 year.

Sarah, could you revert [PR 6786](https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/attachment.cgi?id=9178972) so I can make it safer?
I've tested this on `treeherder-stage` & `treeherder-prototype` & it worked OK, without any problems. However, I've just realized the PR is a bit risky.
It's *too* eager to remove expired data. I mean: if the data is stale for more than an hour, it deletes it.

In the long term, if some extra buggy filter clauses are added [here (in the highlighted code)](https://github.com/mozilla/treeherder/pull/6786/files#diff-fa20070e36ceef4e935c36cbeaee7b2b3a20766add95dfbd586baf998f45c4c6R146-R153), we risk deleting all alert summaries older than an hour.
Perf sheriffing would run into chaos for possibly 2 weeks (it would be basically blind).

I'd rather revert this from master & increase the essential filter condition from `created__lt=one_hour_ago` to `created__lt=one_year_ago`.
It will make it much more bug tolerant & still expire stale summaries. Perf sheriffs really don't care about perf data older than 1 year.

Sarah, could you revert [PR 6786](https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/attachment.cgi?id=9178972) so I can make it safer?
I've tested this on `treeherder-stage` & `treeherder-prototype` & it worked OK, without any problems. However, I've just realized the PR is a bit risky.
It's *too* eager to remove expired data. I mean: if the data is stale for more than an hour, it deletes it.

In the long term, if some extra buggy filter clauses are added [here (in the highlighted code)](https://github.com/mozilla/treeherder/pull/6786/files#diff-fa20070e36ceef4e935c36cbeaee7b2b3a20766add95dfbd586baf998f45c4c6R146-R153), we risk deleting all alert summaries older than an hour.
Perf sheriffing would run into chaos for possibly 2 weeks (it would be basically blind & clueless).

I'd rather revert this from master & increase the essential filter condition from `created__lt=one_hour_ago` to `created__lt=one_year_ago`.
It will make it much more bug tolerant & still expire stale summaries. Perf sheriffs really don't care about perf data older than 1 year.

Sarah, could you revert [PR 6786](https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/attachment.cgi?id=9178972) so I can make it safer?

Back to Bug 1668511 Comment 2