-
Type:
Story
-
Status: Closed (View Workflow)
-
Priority:
Critical
-
Resolution: Fixed
-
Affects Version/s: 0.18 Swallows
-
Fix Version/s: 0.20 Swallows, 1.5 Swallows, 1.4 Swallows
-
Labels:None
As an Admin I'd like to be able to call re-indexing of JCommune search engine so that it can refresh indices if data was injected directly into DB
Details: when we migrate our JavaTalks database for instance, the topics and posts are not entered via JCommune GUI and thus are not indexed. In order the Search Engine to work properly and return correct search results, we need to trigger a full re-indexing of the database. Everything is implemented on JCommune side, but we need to make an HTTP request to it in order to start the process per se.
- blocks
-
POULPE-413 The system incorrectly handles cases when the several users perform editing/deleting the same items.
-
- Open
-
-
JC-620 Revise a mechanism for re-indexing.
-
- Closed
-
- relates to
-
-
- Closed
-
-
-
- Closed
-
1.
|
Add a context menu item for jcommune re-indexing |
|
Closed | Ilya Zhulanov |
|
||||||||
2.
|
A new property for JCommune: URL Address |
|
Closed | Anna Shcherbinina |
|
||||||||
3.
|
User feedback about the re-index starting |
|
Closed | Ilya Zhulanov |
|
Acceptance criteria didn't pass('POULPE-368' subtask).
The system incorrectly handles cases when a user performs the re-index action for deleted component by another user.
Could you please describe what is incorrect? The fact that the request was actually being sent? This doesn't look like an issue for me from both perspectives - from user perspective (okay, the request has been sent, what is inconvenient for me?) and from technical perspective - no harm any of systems.
Also question - why is this task on hold?
The message that everything was successfully re indexed, despite fact that Forum was already deleted by another user, is really confused.
The system in such cases should give the correct message and the re-index action shouldn't be runned.
- There is no impact on the system. Not at all.
- User would see and work with outdated data. The fact that she was able to re-index component that didn't exist in Poulpe database doesn't confuse user because she doesn't know that component was removed
Anyway, the issue is not blocking the story and it's not impacting anything by any means. More problems will be encountered when user edits component that was removed since it would cause exceptions (I guess) because this behavior can happen anywhere, this is not a problem related only to re-indexing.. So I'd leave a bug open, but proceed with the story itself.
I prefer to close this issue acually; re-index funcionality work as expected and problems with simultaneously editing/deletion/ etc were described in POULPE-413.
Verified.
Should i close this task? Not realy understand what does mean type of task = story