[messaging] remove partial sync retry and fix missing datasource error #4371
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
charlesBochet
approved these changes
Mar 8, 2024
charlesBochet
approved these changes
Mar 8, 2024
charlesBochet
deleted the
c--messaging-remove-partial-retry-and-fix-missing-datasource-error
branch
arnavsaxena17
pushed a commit
to arnavsaxena17/twenty
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 6, 2024
twentyhq#4371) * [messaging] remove partial sync retry and fix missing datasource error * revert * fix * add 429 * fix * fix * fix * remove duplicate log * fix cron pattern
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Context
Last PR introduced the wrong fix. Workspaces without Datasources do exist but we should not expect them to have connected accounts.
Also removing the retry on partial sync as this introduces more issues with rate limiting until we handle all the errors properly, this should be fine since this is run inside a cron that is executed fairly often