Update Item Request Names where needful #5012
Open
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Description
Migration to update names on ItemRequest where they do not match the corresponding item.
This happens when Item names are updated.
Prompted because Request export fails if the item names do not match the item request names.
We had fixed this for one bank, but it has recurred. See bugsnag Feb 7 ~10:07 EST
*** This migration is kind of slow -- 5-10 minutes (I wandered off) -- on local **
NOTE
This is still a band-aid -- there are two things to be done to further address the problem.
1/ Reconcile Item Request and Request Item
2/ Rework the Request Export so it isn't dependent on the name in the ItemRequest, se we can then remove it.
These are in the "queue".
Type of change
How Has This Been Tested?
Tested by running request export before (failing) and after (working, and looks reasonable) for someone we know had the problem on a local copy of prod data.