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

Refactor all archivers to be able to handle multiple sites at once #13162

Closed
tsteur opened this issue Jul 11, 2018 · 1 comment
Closed

Refactor all archivers to be able to handle multiple sites at once #13162

tsteur opened this issue Jul 11, 2018 · 1 comment
Labels
c: Performance For when we could improve the performance / speed of Matomo. duplicate For issues that already existed in our issue tracker and were reported previously.

Comments

@tsteur
Copy link
Member

tsteur commented Jul 11, 2018

So far, a couple of archivers have idsite=? in their SQL queries but they should instead have an idsite IN (%s) and bind all sites instead of just the "root" site. This allows for example roll-ups to archive their data by querying the raw data instead of aggregating.

@tsteur tsteur added Major Indicates the severity or impact or benefit of an issue is much higher than normal but not critical. c: Performance For when we could improve the performance / speed of Matomo. labels Jul 11, 2018
@tsteur tsteur removed the Major Indicates the severity or impact or benefit of an issue is much higher than normal but not critical. label Jul 16, 2018
@tsteur
Copy link
Member Author

tsteur commented Sep 5, 2018

was done.

@tsteur tsteur closed this as completed Sep 5, 2018
@mattab mattab added the duplicate For issues that already existed in our issue tracker and were reported previously. label Oct 17, 2018
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
c: Performance For when we could improve the performance / speed of Matomo. duplicate For issues that already existed in our issue tracker and were reported previously.
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants