Skip to content

Ensure archiving for segments uses correct date ranges #20456

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom
Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Mar 15, 2023
Merged

Ensure archiving for segments uses correct date ranges #20456

merged 3 commits into from
Mar 15, 2023

Conversation

sgiehl
Copy link
Member

@sgiehl sgiehl commented Mar 13, 2023

Description:

fixes #20441

Review

@sgiehl sgiehl force-pushed the archivefix branch 4 times, most recently from a001339 to 18acc08 Compare March 13, 2023 19:11
@sgiehl
Copy link
Member Author

sgiehl commented Mar 13, 2023

After a long time and many timezone 🤬 I finally was able to add some proper tests.
Cherry picking the last commit to 4.x-dev and running TimezonesTest tests will show the difference. While the nomatch segment is desinged to match no visit it will match a couple of visits on 4.x-dev, as the range limit doesn't work correctly there, but is fixed in this PR.

@sgiehl sgiehl requested a review from tsteur March 13, 2023 19:17
@sgiehl sgiehl added this to the 4.14.0 milestone Mar 13, 2023
@sgiehl sgiehl added the Needs Review PRs that need a code review label Mar 13, 2023
bx80
bx80 approved these changes Mar 15, 2023
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@bx80 bx80 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I can confirm that this fixes the incorrect query bind parameters for segment dates as described in #20441 👍

tsteur
tsteur reviewed Mar 15, 2023
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@tsteur tsteur left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Tested this and worked nicely for me @sgiehl Could we maybe also add some other tests eg for Transition API to ensure it works well there too?

@sgiehl
Copy link
Member Author

sgiehl commented Mar 15, 2023

@tsteur I've adjusted the tests so they also query the Transitions API. It's the same there. The tests work on this branch, but the no match tests would have unexpected results on 4.x-dev. So this ensures the changes fixes the issue there as well.

@sgiehl sgiehl merged commit a33e671 into 4.x-dev Mar 15, 2023
@sgiehl sgiehl deleted the archivefix branch March 15, 2023 14:18
@bx80 bx80 added the not-in-changelog For issues or pull requests that should not be included in our release changelog on matomo.org. label Mar 16, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@tsteur tsteur tsteur left review comments

+1 more reviewer

@bx80 bx80 bx80 approved these changes

Reviewers whose approvals may not affect merge requirements
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
Needs Review PRs that need a code review not-in-changelog For issues or pull requests that should not be included in our release changelog on matomo.org.
Milestone
4.14.0
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Wrong dates used in a specific segment query and as a result barely any results would match
3 participants
@sgiehl @tsteur @bx80