oxidecomputer / oxidecomputer/omicron
`ereport` and `ereporter_restart` tables grow unbounded
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- Rust
- Stars
- 572
- Forks
- 97
- Avg merge
- 2d 12h
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 96
Description
Our current retention policy for the ereport and ereporter_restart tables is "forever." This is going to bite us sometime. We need to figure out when it's safe to clean up old ereports and their corresponding ereporter incarnations.
From chat:
@mergeconflict: i have no idea offhand how we'd know when it's safe to gc an ereport or ereporter_restart
@hawkw: yeah, that's the problem: i don't either
@hawkw: the thing is that we need to be very cautious about deleting ereports, especially those which FM does not currently process, because they are useful to support...even when they're from several months ago
@hawkw: there is both "what is actively in use by FM" and "what is support going to want if they're, say, looking at the complete history of power events on a customer site?"
See also #9384 for a related concern.
Contributor guide
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
Research direction
No files, tests, or entry points are named in the issue. Read the discussion and related issue #9384 first, then investigate how ereports and ereporter incarnations are used before defining a safe retention policy; done means an agreed cleanup criterion that preserves support history and active FM use.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- rust
- Domain
- database
- Issue type
- Feature
- Difficulty
- 5/5
- Estimated time
- Over a week
- Activity status
- Quiet
- Clarity
- Needs clarification
- Newbie friendliness
- 25/100