Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Review: app config sync properties #2827

Open
wants to merge 4 commits into
base: feat/app-config-sync-properties
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

chrismclarke
Copy link
Member

@chrismclarke chrismclarke commented Mar 4, 2025

PR Checklist

  • PR title descriptive (can be used in release notes)

Description

Targets branch of #2822
Refactor server sync frequency to deployment-level API config

Dev Notes

The main change here is to move the server sync configuration to deployment-level config instead of runtime, as it makes more sense for this to be a fixed value instead of template-dependent. As mentioned in the target issue, if wanting to block syncing for whatever reason I think we should probably build on top of this with a public method and/or authoring action that can disable sync.

I've also refactored the db-sync.service a little to share sync schedule with the server.service. I was initially confused why there were two services performing similar tasks, but then remembered the original server service was designed for syncing to the app_users table and the db-sync any other table (currently feedback and app_notification_interaction). That being said I think it makes sense to merge these together over time (or provider cleaner separation) as it feels a bit confusing, so for now I've moved all sync scheduling tasks to the server service

Git Issues

Closes #

Screenshots/Videos

If useful, provide screenshot or capture to highlight main changes

@chrismclarke chrismclarke changed the base branch from master to feat/app-config-sync-properties March 4, 2025 00:53
@chrismclarke chrismclarke requested a review from jfmcquade March 4, 2025 00:53
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant