adding a mechanism for cleaning the database #25
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Don't want to be too picky since this isn't something that's going to be kept around, but did have a few comments.
In the end, I want to
- make sure the filtering logic is good (from 2020 with multiple sessions and updated in 2022).
- I think it would be helpful to have the option to just list the sessions that would be deleted.
|
Before anything, I would recommend just getting Eva's input on this, Shak. Since this is just a one-time tool to clean up some specific set of bad data, maybe it's fine to just merge this in and run it? 🤷 |
| if sys.argv[-1] == "real": | ||
| for session in sessions_for_delete: | ||
| db_models.Session.collection.delete(session.key) | ||
| elif sys.argv[-1] == "dry_run": | ||
| print(f"This is a dry run, but if it were real, {len(sessions_for_delete)} duplicates would be deleted.") | ||
| else: | ||
| print("Please pass a valid parameter: \"real\" or \"dry_run.\"") |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This works but better practice would be to use purposeful module like argparse.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Also typically, programs will accept just a 'dry run' switch. And if not given, run in 'real' mode. i.e. The 'real' option here is sort of redundant I think.
I do agree running in 'dry run' by default isn't a bad idea here, for safety. And run in 'real' mode only if argument is set.
| sessions_for_delete = [] | ||
| sessions = db_models.Session.collection.fetch(1000) | ||
| for session in sessions: | ||
| response = "" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is this variable (response) being used anywhere?
This is the file to run on the server. Before running, I recommend deleting just one record rather than all the records for testing.