Skip to content

Database Dictionary Audit for Verify:Pipeline Authoring

Recently the database team has started documenting all database tables in db/doc. As an MVP, we've assigned each table to a feature category. We attempted to automate this, and then made rough guesses on the ones that couldn't be automatically identified either using this spreadsheet or just by guessing based on their name and code references. In order to make sure these are accurate, I'm asking every team to take a look at the tables associated with their feature categories assoicated with their stages.

What we need from your team? Look through the list of tables and fix any mistaken labels and update the description field to help folks know what purpose the table serves.

Process (per table)

  1. Are the feature categories correct?
    • Keep in mind that tables can have multiple categories. Look at the list and if there are any other categories it belongs to, add them.
    • If a table has no category that seems to be a perfect match, assign it to the closest match. Tables must have at least one feature category.
    • If the table is assigned to a feature category for a different group, open a merge request changing the category and assign it to the EM for the group responsible for that category.
  2. Update the description of the table to give anybody interacting with it context around the purpose and submit a merge request with the information.
  3. Double check the milestone and introduced_by_url to see if they are accurate

Tables

  • ci_variables

    • pipeline_authoring is the correct feature category or has been updated
    • ci_variables description has been updated - these are project vars
    • ci_variables milestone and introduced_by_url seem accurate

  • ci_build_needs

    • pipeline_authoring is the correct feature category or has been updated
    • ci_build_needs description has been updated
    • ci_build_needs milestone and introduced_by_url seem accurate

  • ci_instance_variables

    • pipeline_authoring is the correct feature category or has been updated
    • ci_instance_variables description has been updated
    • ci_instance_variables milestone and introduced_by_url seem accurate

  • ci_pipeline_messages (belongs to grouppipeline authoring - moved over from https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab/-/issues/359339)

    • fix feature category from continuous_integration to pipeline_authoring
    • ci_pipeline_messages description has been updated
    • ci_pipeline_messages milestone and introduced_by_url seem accurate

  • ci_pipeline_variables

    • pipeline_authoring is the correct feature category or has been updated
    • ci_pipeline_variables description has been updated
    • ci_pipeline_variables milestone and introduced_by_url seem accurate

  • ci_job_variables

    • pipeline_authoring is the correct feature category or has been updated
    • ci_job_variables description has been updated
    • ci_job_variables milestone and introduced_by_url seem accurate

  • ci_group_variables

    • pipeline_authoring is the correct feature category or has been updated
    • ci_group_variables description has been updated
    • ci_group_variables milestone and introduced_by_url seem accurate

  • ci_sources_pipelines

    • transferred from pipeline_execution to pipeline_authoring feature category
    • ci_sources_pipelines description has been updated
    • ci_sources_pipelines milestone and introduced_by_url seem accurate

NOT grouppipeline authoring :

  • ci_secure_files (belongs to groupincubation - moved over to #364528 (closed))

    • pipeline_authoring is the correct feature category or has been updated
    • ci_secure_files description has been updated
    • ci_secure_files milestone and introduced_by_url seem accurate

  • ci_job_token_project_scope_links (belongs to grouppipeline execution - moved over to https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab/-/issues/359339)

    • pipeline_authoring is the correct feature category or has been updated
    • ci_job_token_project_scope_links description has been updated
    • ci_job_token_project_scope_links milestone and introduced_by_url seem accurate

  • group_deploy_tokens (belongs to ~"group::release" - moved over to #359348 (closed))

    • secrets_management is the correct feature category or has been updated
    • group_deploy_tokens description has been updated
    • group_deploy_tokens milestone and introduced_by_url seem accurate

  • group_deploy_keys (belongs to ~"group::release" - moved over to #359348 (closed))

    • secrets_management is the correct feature category or has been updated
    • group_deploy_keys description has been updated
    • group_deploy_keys milestone and introduced_by_url seem accurate

Why is this effort happening?

There have been many times that issues occur in production, but the the infrastructure team doesn't have the information it needs to identify subject matter experts who can help resolve things quickly. This in turn can delay the time it takes to find and fix pressing issues.

How much time should we expect to spend on this?

Depends, if the team has a lot of tables, it may take a little bit to get all of the information together. If not, this could be very fast. The descriptions are as much or little as the team wants to add. More information may help folks self service better.

How urgent is this?

The urgency is up to the team. If the tables have poor information or are misassigned, that may cause more burden on the team when answering questions.

Edited by Mark Nuzzo