Grouper Users - Open Discussion List

["Hyzer, Chris" <>]

There are no new rows for this patch, but there were a few attribute 
assignments added to loaded groups from a previous patch.  There are no 
audits or point in time associated with the attributes which change each time 
the loader runs for the job in this patch.  We have worked hard to make sure 
this is as lightweight as possible and Grouper assumes they are there.  Added 
some metadata on groups is not on my radar as something that needs to be 
optional for performance reasons.  Ok?  :)

Thanks
Chris

-----Original Message-----
From: Scott Koranda 
[mailto:]
 
Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2018 12:31 PM
To: Hyzer, Chris 
<>
Cc: grouper-users 
<>
Subject: Re: [grouper-users] StaleObjectStateException thrown by loader jobs 
after patch

Hi,

> This is fixed in patches grouper_v2_3_0_api_patch_92, and 
> grouper_v2_3_0_ui_patch_41.  Also released are some updates from Vivek and 
> me about loader metadata.
> 
> https://spaces.internet2.edu/display/Grouper/Grouper+Loader+-+Changes+for+deprovisioning
> 
> You can see which groups a loader job manages (see link for screenshots), 
> and see that a group is managed (or was managed) by the loader.
> 
> Some other API changes were needed to make this work properly.
> 
> https://bugs.internet2.edu/jira/browse/GRP-1624: Add loader metadata 
> attributes to groups that are loaded via grouper loader
> https://bugs.internet2.edu/jira/browse/GRP-1681: allow attribute values to 
> be updated without worrying about locking, hooks, auditing, etc
> https://bugs.internet2.edu/jira/browse/GRP-1687: allow search for groups by 
> multiple attributes and values
> https://bugs.internet2.edu/jira/browse/GRP-1678: grouperLoader attribute 
> metadata has incorrect groupId and unassigns attributes that shouldnt be 
> causing stale state exceptions
> 
> Let me know how it goes.

Am I correct that the first time the loader starts after applying these
patches every single loader group will have to be updated with the new
attributes, and I should expect a significant increase in the number of
rows in my database?

Is there any guidance on the performance implications of this change?

Is there any mechanism to disable it?

Thanks,

Scott K