JeroenDeDauw added a comment.

  I was wondering about how much extra complexity the post request approach (4) 
would bring. In particular, which info do we need to give to the job. Giving 
the property id is not sufficient. You could give the ids of the text records 
and then in the job check if they are still unused and do the same for the 
higher level records that point to those text records. Thing is, if you already 
need to find the unused records in the request, then you can just as well 
delete them right away. Either way you have a performance penalty. So I think 
the simpler approach (immediate cleanup (3)) makes more sense as a starting 
point. Does that make sense to you?
  
  > As pointed out at some point we probably want to remove the strings from 
the table fairly sharpish, as content my be removed, revdeled, and should not 
continue to appear in public places such as labs dB replicas.
  
  Interesting. Treating our internal storage as public even when it can't be 
accessed via the software is kinda weird. People that have access to a replica 
can just log/copy everything anyway, so this is a bit of a half measure. From 
an architecture PoV I'd also prefer the persistence details to be private and 
to have well defined interfaces. That's for when we talk about the labs use 
case(s) though :)

TASK DETAIL
  https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T220150

EMAIL PREFERENCES
  https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/settings/panel/emailpreferences/

To: JeroenDeDauw
Cc: Ladsgroup, Addshore, alaa_wmde, Aklapper, JeroenDeDauw, Nandana, Lahi, 
Gq86, GoranSMilovanovic, QZanden, LawExplorer, _jensen, rosalieper, 
Wikidata-bugs, aude, Lydia_Pintscher, Mbch331
_______________________________________________
Wikidata-bugs mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-bugs

Reply via email to