feat: Update batch exports usage report #37580
Conversation
* Removed filter for events model so all models are captured. * Excluded HTTP batch exports as we do not have plans to include them in usage calculations.
![greptile-apps[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/867647?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
| @@ -940,9 +940,9 @@ def get_teams_with_rows_exported_in_period(begin: datetime, end: datetime) -> li | |||
| finished_at__gte=begin, | |||
| finished_at__lte=end, | |||
| status=BatchExportRun.Status.COMPLETED, | |||
| batch_export__model=BatchExport.Model.EVENTS, | |||
| batch_export__deleted=False, | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Do you know why this filter is present? Just thinking we could be missing runs executed before a batch export being deleted. Or do you think we don't need to worry about this?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Do you know why this filter is present?
No idea, I asked in slack about this and seemed like removing it was the way to go.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Just thinking we could be missing runs executed before a batch export being deleted. Or do you think we don't need to worry about this?
How could this happen? Also, why would removing a filter cause us to miss runs? If anything we should be capturing more runs than with the filter?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
oh sorry, I was referring to the batch_export__deleted=False filter. Not sure what the typical time period is here but just thinking a customer could run a large backfill then delete their batch export
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Oh, no clue about that one, I haven't considered it. I guess we need to chat a bit about it.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
ok, might be a bit of an edge case but won't let it block this PR
Problem
Batch exports usage report is out of date.
Changes
How did you test this code?
👉 Stay up-to-date with PostHog coding conventions for a smoother review.