Skip to content

feat(eap-items): Point eap_items_dlq_replay at eap_items_2 tables - #8575

Merged
tryangul merged 1 commit into
masterfrom
fix/eap-items-dlq-replay-to-eap-items-2
Oct 20, 2026
Merged

tryangul merged 1 commit into
masterfrom
fix/eap-items-dlq-replay-to-eap-items-2

Conversation

@sentry-junior

@sentry-junior sentry-junior Bot commented Oct 20, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Repoints the existing eap_items_dlq_replay storage from eap_items_1_local / eap_items_1_dist to eap_items_2_local / eap_items_2_dist. The main eap-items-consumer in us, de and s4s2 now writes eap_items_2, so DLQ replays should land there too.

The schema and UUIDColumnProcessor columns are synced with eap_items_2, which adds conversation_id, session_id and ai_conversation_id. They had drifted from the primary storage. The storage name, the input topic (snuba-dead-letter-items) and the lack of a dlq_topic don't change. Because the name doesn't change, eap_items_dlq_grace_period_min still has no entry for it, so replayed rows aren't DLQ'd again.

This applies everywhere the replay consumer runs with the default storage. Any replay consumer that's running when this deploys starts writing eap_items_2 on its next restart. No ops change is needed for regions that use the default storage. This replaces #8570, which added a separate eap_items_2_dlq_replay storage instead.

via Ryan Broughan.

--

View Junior Session [Sentry]

@sentry-junior
sentry-junior Bot requested review from a team as code owners October 20, 2026 20:16

@tryangul tryangul left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@tryangul
tryangul enabled auto-merge (squash) October 20, 2026 20:20
@tryangul
tryangul merged commit 4190cd2 into master Oct 20, 2026
69 checks passed
@tryangul
tryangul deleted the fix/eap-items-dlq-replay-to-eap-items-2 branch October 20, 2026 20:34
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants