isolated db in its own module #601
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
sellnat77
suggested changes
May 10, 2020
| from .databaseOrm import Ingest as Request | ||
| from utils.database import db | ||
|
|
||
|
|
||
| class DataService(object): |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We can probably remove this constructor altogether at this point
We can move the table name to a constant in this class and the indv methods can define alternate tables (when and if) we decide to break the db into diff tables
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Good call, I removed the constructor. And then updated the services that call the DataService, so it's created without arguments.
As for the table name, turns out it wasn't even being used anywhere in the DataService. So I deleted it for now. If we split up tables we can add it as a constant, so it would be like a default table that can be overridden.
sellnat77
approved these changes
May 10, 2020
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
I'm somewhat confident that this will fix the db connection bug (#550). Of course we won't know for sure until it's live on production. And if it doesn't work, there's some logging code in this PR that we can enable to help find the issue.
The idea here is to isolate the sqlalchemy engine in its own module so that we're not running
create_engineon every request. The engine gets configured when the app loads. This is similar to how the redis connection is configured.devbranchAny questions? See the getting started guide