Before this PR: We don't really have telemetry when things are deleted.
After this PR:
==COMMIT_MSG==
On tables the user finds interesting, we can log when we attempt to apply deletions.
==COMMIT_MSG==
Priority: high P2, relevant in some other high priority investigations
Concerns / possible downsides (what feedback would you like?):
Safety stuff needs to be right!
Is documentation needed?: No
Compatibility
Does this PR create any API breaks (e.g. at the Java or HTTP layers) - if so, do we have compatibility?: No
Does this PR change the persisted format of any data - if so, do we have forward and backward compatibility?: No
The code in this PR may be part of a blue-green deploy. Can upgrades from previous versions safely coexist? (Consider restarts of blue or green nodes.): Yes
Does this PR rely on statements being true about other products at a deployment - if so, do we have correct product dependencies on these products (or other ways of verifying that these statements are true)?: No
Does this PR need a schema migration? No
Testing and Correctness
What, if any, assumptions are made about the current state of the world? If they change over time, how will we find out?: Configs are safe. I think that's always a thing we hold.
What was existing testing like? What have you done to improve it?: I haven't š¤®
If this PR contains complex concurrent or asynchronous code, is it correct? The onus is on the PR writer to demonstrate this.: N/A
If this PR involves acquiring locks or other shared resources, how do we ensure that these are always released?: N/A
Execution
How would I tell this PR works in production? (Metrics, logs, etc.): Logs are produced correctly
Has the safety of all log arguments been decided correctly?: I believe so but please verify
Will this change significantly affect our spending on metrics or logs?: Probably not, it's restricted to a small selection of user-configured tables
How would I tell that this PR does not work in production? (monitors, etc.): Logs aren't produced correctly.
If this PR does not work as expected, how do I fix that state? Would rollback be straightforward?: Rollback. If something turned out to be leaked, follow the usual process.
If the above plan is more complex than ārecall and rollbackā, please tag the support PoC here (if it is the end of the week, tag both the current and next PoC):
Scale
Would this PR be expected to pose a risk at scale? Think of the shopping product at our largest stack.: No
Would this PR be expected to perform a large number of database calls, and/or expensive database calls (e.g., row range scans, concurrent CAS)?: No
Would this PR ever, with time and scale, become the wrong thing to do - and if so, how would we know that we need to do something differently?: Just don't put this on tables with high throughput
Development Process
Where should we start reviewing?: Small
If this PR is in excess of 500 lines excluding versions lock-files, why does it not make sense to split it?:
Please tag any other people who should be aware of this PR:
@jeremyk-91
@sverma30
@raiju
General
Before this PR: We don't really have telemetry when things are deleted.
After this PR:
==COMMIT_MSG== On tables the user finds interesting, we can log when we attempt to apply deletions. ==COMMIT_MSG==
Priority: high P2, relevant in some other high priority investigations
Concerns / possible downsides (what feedback would you like?):
Is documentation needed?: No
Compatibility
Does this PR create any API breaks (e.g. at the Java or HTTP layers) - if so, do we have compatibility?: No
Does this PR change the persisted format of any data - if so, do we have forward and backward compatibility?: No
The code in this PR may be part of a blue-green deploy. Can upgrades from previous versions safely coexist? (Consider restarts of blue or green nodes.): Yes
Does this PR rely on statements being true about other products at a deployment - if so, do we have correct product dependencies on these products (or other ways of verifying that these statements are true)?: No
Does this PR need a schema migration? No
Testing and Correctness
What, if any, assumptions are made about the current state of the world? If they change over time, how will we find out?: Configs are safe. I think that's always a thing we hold.
What was existing testing like? What have you done to improve it?: I haven't š¤®
If this PR contains complex concurrent or asynchronous code, is it correct? The onus is on the PR writer to demonstrate this.: N/A
If this PR involves acquiring locks or other shared resources, how do we ensure that these are always released?: N/A
Execution
How would I tell this PR works in production? (Metrics, logs, etc.): Logs are produced correctly
Has the safety of all log arguments been decided correctly?: I believe so but please verify
Will this change significantly affect our spending on metrics or logs?: Probably not, it's restricted to a small selection of user-configured tables
How would I tell that this PR does not work in production? (monitors, etc.): Logs aren't produced correctly.
If this PR does not work as expected, how do I fix that state? Would rollback be straightforward?: Rollback. If something turned out to be leaked, follow the usual process.
If the above plan is more complex than ārecall and rollbackā, please tag the support PoC here (if it is the end of the week, tag both the current and next PoC):
Scale
Would this PR be expected to pose a risk at scale? Think of the shopping product at our largest stack.: No
Would this PR be expected to perform a large number of database calls, and/or expensive database calls (e.g., row range scans, concurrent CAS)?: No
Would this PR ever, with time and scale, become the wrong thing to do - and if so, how would we know that we need to do something differently?: Just don't put this on tables with high throughput
Development Process
Where should we start reviewing?: Small
If this PR is in excess of 500 lines excluding versions lock-files, why does it not make sense to split it?:
Please tag any other people who should be aware of this PR: @jeremyk-91 @sverma30 @raiju