Skip to content
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.

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

fix crash in scramble script by adding try/except guard on node saving #810

Open
wants to merge 6 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

WillNilges
Copy link
Collaborator

Title. Ran into this while getting a new dev online

Copy link

codecov bot commented Jan 20, 2025

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 94.88%. Comparing base (af6f44f) to head (a6b7f46).
Report is 15 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #810      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   94.88%   94.88%   -0.01%     
==========================================
  Files          89       91       +2     
  Lines        3816     3892      +76     
==========================================
+ Hits         3621     3693      +72     
- Misses        195      199       +4     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

Comment on lines 39 to 41
# This transaction is not atomic so that even if there's some error with
# the scrambled data, we can scramble it partially. I'd rather break someone's
# dev env than give someone PII accidentally
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Doesn't removing the atomic block make it more likely that we will disclose PII? Since a single row could fail silently?

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

whoops, I forgot to push again. I have another commit that sets up atomic for each individual transaction.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants