The site settings beginning with "topic views heat" and "topic post like
heat" are set to defaults when installing Discourse, but there has not
been a process or guidance for updating these values based on
community activity.
This feature will update them once a month. The low, medium, and
high settings will be based on the minimums of the 45th, 25th, and
10th percentile topics respectively, so that 45% of topics will have
some "heat".
Disable automatic changes with the automatic_topic_heat_values setting.
This does two things
1. Our "index grace period" has been wound down to 1 day, there is no point
keeping a bloated index for a week, usually when people delete stuff they
mean for it to be removed
2. We were never dropping deleted posts from the index, only posts from
deleted topics
These changes speed up search a tiny bit and reduce background work.
The `AutoQueueHandler` will ignore really old flags. In that case, don't
notify the user that the moderator is looking into it. They probably
never saw it because it didn't meet the reviewable minimum priority.
This reduces chances of errors where consumers of strings mutate inputs
and reduces memory usage of the app.
Test suite passes now, but there may be some stuff left, so we will run
a few sites on a branch prior to merging
We found score hard to understand. It is still there behind the scenes
for sorting purposes, but it is no longer shown.
You can now filter by minimum priority (low, med, high) instead of
score.
This removes all uses of both `send` and `public_send` from consumers of
SiteSetting and instead introduces a `get` helper for dynamic lookup
This leads to much cleaner and safer code long term as we are always explicit
to test that a site setting is really there before sending an arbitrary
string to the class
It also removes a couple of risky stubs from the auth provider test
After careful analysis of large data-sets it became apparent that avg_time
had no impact whatsoever on "best of" topic scoring. Calculating avg_time
was a very costly operation especially on large databases.
We have some longer term plans of introducing other weighting that is read
time based into our scoring for "best of" and "top" topics, but in the
interim to stop a large amount of work that is not achieving any value we
are removing the jobs.
Column removal will follow once we decide on a new replacement metric.
`Upload#url` is more likely and can change from time to time. When it
does changes, we don't want to have to look through multiple tables to
ensure that the URLs are all up to date. Instead, we simply associate
uploads properly to `UserProfile` so that it does not have to replicate
the URLs in the table.
also add a hard limit of 1000 users per job run so we do not clog the
scheduler
destroyer.destroy has a transaction and this can have some serious complications
with the open record set find_each has going
Conversely, if a user is deactivated the reviewable should automatically
be rejected.
Before this fix, if a user was not active they'd still show in the
review queue but without an "Approve" button which was confusing.
If the post ids keep loading, we might end up in a situations where
we're always loading the same post ids over and over again without
indexing anything new.
Follow up to daeda80ada.
Includes support for flags, reviewable users and queued posts, with REST API
backwards compatibility.
Co-Authored-By: romanrizzi <romanalejandro@gmail.com>
Co-Authored-By: jjaffeux <j.jaffeux@gmail.com>
* Remove use of 0 in favor of `TrustLevel.levels[:newuser]`.
* Consolidate two tests into a single one.
* Test that disabling the feature works.
* Avoid loading full ActiveRecord object in test when we only need to
know the existence of the record.
* FEATURE: Add `IgnoredUsersSummary` daily job
## Why?
This is part of the [Ability to ignore a user feature](https://meta.discourse.org/t/ability-to-ignore-a-user/110254/8).
We want to:
1. Send an automatic group PM that goes out to moderators
2. When {x} users have Ignored the same user, threshold defined by a site setting, default of 5
3. Only send this message every X days which is defined by another site setting
There was a situation where if:
* There were new flags to review that met the visibility threshold
AND
* There were old flags that *didn't* meet the threshold
THEN
a pending flags notification would be sent out. This fixes that case.
Staff should not be notified of flags if they do not meet the threshold
and are old.
This commit introduces an ultra low priority queue for post rebakes. This
way rebakes can never interfere with regular sidekiq processing for cases
where we perform a large scale rebake.
Additionally it allows Post.rebake_old to be run with rate_limiter: false
to avoid triggering the limiter when rebaking. This is handy for cases
where you want to just force the full rebake and not wait for it to trickle
This allows us to run regular rebakes without starving the normal queue.
It additionally adds the ability to specify queue with `Jobs.enqueue` so
we can specifically queue a job with lower priority using the `queue` arg.
- moderation tab
- sorting/pagination
- improved third party reports support
- trending charts
- better perf
- many fixes
- refactoring
- new reports
Co-Authored-By: Simon Cossar <scossar@users.noreply.github.com>
Bianca Nenciu
Neil Lalonde
Sam Saffron
Robin Ward
Gerhard Schlager
Guo Xiang Tan
Dan Ungureanu
Régis Hanol
Tarek Khalil
Vinoth Kannan
Guo Xiang Tan
Saurabh Patel
David Taylor
Bianca Nenciu
Simon Cossar
Osama Sayegh
Joffrey JAFFEUX