Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Acknowledging this is draft and may change, just making sure to call out that these migrations would need to happen over multiple deploys, including code changes to reference both possible column names when in 50/50 state.
https://handbook.login.gov/articles/manage-50-50-state.html#database-changes
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@aduth - while the column socure_docv_token already exists in the database, its use it sits behind a feature flag and has not yet been used in dev, staging nor prod. also the column is only written to and not read from. i believe this should be able to go in 1 deploy, correct?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ah, in that case, could we collapse the two migrations to a single migration which renames the column? Or at least drops and creates the new column in one go.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I wish StrongMigrations' documentation included more details than just "will cause errors", but based on their "safer approach" guidelines, I do think we'd be safe if we're not currently using this column.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
There's also a rename_column_safely helper from StrongMigrations, which preserves the expressivity while doing it the way they recommend. Based on previous comment, don't know that it's strictly necessary.
amirbey
requested review from
a team and
solipet
and removed request for
a team
amirbey
changed the title
amirbey
changed the title
amirbey
force-pushed
the
amirbey/LG-14815-rename-docv-token
branch
from
18d8321 to
ee9917f
Compare
3 participants
🎫 Ticket
Link to the relevant ticket:
LG-14815
🛠 Summary of changes
Rename column from socure_docv_token to socure_docv_transaction_token in document_capture_sessions table