Conversation
Member
Author
|
@cla-bot check |
oxzi
reviewed
Jun 22, 2026
Member
Author
|
Addressed all your requested changes and also added an index for the |
Member
Author
|
Just rebased it to get the latest changes from the main branch. |
oxzi
reviewed
Jul 1, 2026
oxzi
left a comment
oxzi
left a comment
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
In general, this PR looks fine - just two small things. Nevertheless, I have successfully tested this PR branch with a working retention configuration.
oxzi
approved these changes
Jul 1, 2026
This file contains hidden or 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
2 participants
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
This PR adds a configurable retention policy to periodically cleanup historical data. It's designed to be as generic as possible to support all kind of tables (e.g. we might also want to purge all entries from everywhere marked as
deleted = yin the future) even though we only need this for theincidentand all its related tables right now. It's similar to Icinga DB's retention policy but not necessarily the same, so I didn't try to deduplicate it into IGL.resolves #393
resolves #391