PP-11205 Add endpoint to expunge and archive historical data #2233
Conversation
- Added endpoint to expunge and archive historical data
kbottla
force-pushed
the
pp_11205_add_endpoint
branch
from
ea23ace to
36c7dfe
Compare
| } | ||
|
|
||
| @Test | ||
| void shouldArchiveHistoricalServicesAndDetachUsers() throws JsonProcessingException { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Couple of questions here.
- Does detaching a user mean the user will still be in the
userstable? If so the test should assert that user still exists. - If a user hasn't logged in for more than
EXPUNGE_USER_DATA_AFTER_DAYSdays but is still attached to a live service, does the user get detached/deleted?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
yeah, the user will still be in the users table. I have added an assertion for this.
- Users are detached (irrespective of when they are logged in) when the service is archived
- Only users not associated with any service are deleted after not logged in for more than
EXPUNGE_USER_DATA_AFTER_DAYS
| @@ -16,6 +18,7 @@ public class LedgerTransaction { | |||
| private String reference; | |||
|
|
|||
| @JsonDeserialize(using = ApiResponseDateTimeDeserializer.class) | |||
| @JsonSerialize(using = ApiResponseDateTimeSerializer.class) | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
What's the reason for this line?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| @@ -121,4 +127,13 @@ private void restoreDropwizardsLogging() { | |||
| app.getApplication().getName()); | |||
| } | |||
|
|
|||
| private ConfigOverride[] overrideUrlsConfig(ConfigOverride[] configOverrides) { | |||
| List<ConfigOverride> newConfigOverride = newArrayList(configOverrides); | |||
| newConfigOverride.add(config("ledgerBaseURL", "http://localhost:" + wireMockPort)); | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Why can't this line be added to the newConfigOverrides directly?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Can add it directly. Started with overriding other URLs too but later kept only the ledger URL. Updated!
| .withHeader(CONTENT_TYPE, APPLICATION_JSON) | ||
| .withStatus(200) | ||
| .withBody(objectMapper.writeValueAsString(ledgerResponse)); | ||
| wireMockExtension.stubFor( |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is the wireMockExtension.stubFor used here instead of wireMockServer.stubFor because wireMockServer doesn't work with Junit 5 tests?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yeah using Extension because of Junit5. We are using @Rule elsewhere for wireMockServer which doesn't work with Junit5.
WHAT YOU DID