Use a rake task to delete cached attachments #4596
Merged
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
![github-actions[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/15368?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
javierm
force-pushed
the
cached_attachments_task
branch
3 times, most recently
from
4aabfd4
to
a0b372f
Compare
javierm
force-pushed
the
cached_attachments_task
branch
2 times, most recently
from
9fd4f11
to
930bb75
Compare
Our previous system to delete cached attachments didn't work for documents because the `custom_hash_data` is different for files created from a file and files created from cached attachments. When creating a document attachment, the name of the file is taken into account to calculate the hash. Let's say the original file name is "logo.pdf", and the generated hash is "123456". The cached attachment will be "123456.pdf", so the generated hash using the cached attachment will be something different, like "28af3". So the file that will be removed will be "28af3.pdf", and not "123456.pdf", which will still be present. Furthermore, there are times where users choose a file and then they close the browser or go to a different page. In those cases, we weren't deleting the cached attachments either. So we're adding a rake task to delete these files once a day. This way we can simplify the logic we were using to destroy cached attachments. Note there's related a bug in documents: when editing a record (for example, a proposal), if the title of the document changes, its hash changes, and so it will be impossible to generate a link to that document. Changing the way this hash is generated is not an option because it would break links to existing files. We'll try to fix it when moving to Active Storage.
taitus
approved these changes
Aug 2, 2021
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.
Background
Our previous system to delete cached attachments didn't work for documents because the
custom_hash_datais different for files created from a file and files created from cached attachments.When creating a document attachment, the name of the file is taken into account to calculate the hash. Let's say the original file name is "logo.pdf", and the generated hash is "123456". The cached attachment will be "123456.pdf", so the generated hash using the cached attachment will be something different, like "28af3". So the file that will be removed will be "28af3.pdf", and not "123456.pdf", which will still be present.
Furthermore, there are times where users choose a file and then they close the browser or go to a different page. In those cases, we weren't deleting the cached attachments either.
Objectives
Notes
There's related a bug in documents: when editing a record (for example, a proposal), if the title of the document changes, its hash changes, and so it will be impossible to generate a link to that document. Changing the way this hash is generated is not an option because it would break links to existing files. We'll fix it when moving to Active Storage in pull request #4600.