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

Skip loading the rule's schedule after an alerting rule runs #192396

Closed
2 tasks
mikecote opened this issue Sep 9, 2024 · 1 comment · Fixed by #192402
Closed
2 tasks

Skip loading the rule's schedule after an alerting rule runs #192396

mikecote opened this issue Sep 9, 2024 · 1 comment · Fixed by #192402
Assignees
Labels
Feature:Alerting Team:ResponseOps Label for the ResponseOps team (formerly the Cases and Alerting teams)

Comments

@mikecote
Copy link
Contributor

mikecote commented Sep 9, 2024

We previous loaded the alerting rule's schedule at the end of a run so we could update the task schedule if ever the rule was updated while the rule was running. This edge case comes at the cost of loading each rule a second time, causing a lot of unnecessary I/O at scale. Instead we should re-use the rule schedule from the rule that was loaded before the alerting rule ran. In the edge case scenario, the rule will take it's new schedule at the end of the next execution.

Definition of Done

  • Rule is only loaded once at the beginning of a rule run
  • Schedule is still returned at the end of a task run but from the rule object loaded at the beginning
@mikecote mikecote added Feature:Alerting Team:ResponseOps Label for the ResponseOps team (formerly the Cases and Alerting teams) labels Sep 9, 2024
@elasticmachine
Copy link
Contributor

Pinging @elastic/response-ops (Team:ResponseOps)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Feature:Alerting Team:ResponseOps Label for the ResponseOps team (formerly the Cases and Alerting teams)
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

3 participants