Add Observation Deletion Functionality. #746
Conversation
- Implement unified method for deleting observations and associated data products. - Resolve bug preventing deletion of thumbnails. - Introduce new template for observation deletion process.
davner
force-pushed
the
enhancement/delete-observation
branch
from
28ffe10 to
4428d9b
Compare
|
I'm very far outside of the TOM Toolkit community at this point, so hopefully this isn't too out of the blue, but it seems to me that it might be more desirable to have a bulk data delete as a script, but for an individual delete to simply mark an observation as "deleted" with a To me, the use cases for deletion are to remove visual clutter, and to improve performance (which feels more in line with data product deletion), but there may still be value in keeping a record of the observation, even if the data that came out of it wasn't of value. Obviously up to the maintainers, just saw this come through and figured I'd offer my two cents. |
|
I agree that a way to bulk delete data is important, and that's a request from our users as well. I will be implementing that soon. I see it being beneficial to offer both capabilities. The function I wrote that loops through an observation record could be used as the bulk deleter. |
|
Sorry to jump in here, but we were just discussing a related issue in our group. Is there a way to cancel an observation through the TOM? I'm not aware of one, but it would be helpful. This would not delete the |
|
You're very welcome to comment here @hosseinzadeh, Griffin - (griffin0)
***@***.***> !
It may be a separate issue, since both functions would be very useful for a
lot of TOM users.
…On Thu, Dec 14, 2023 at 3:41 PM Griffin Hosseinzadeh < ***@***.***> wrote:
Sorry to jump in here, but we were just discussing a related issue in our
group. Is there a way to cancel an observation through the TOM? I'm not
aware of one, but it would be helpful. This would not delete the
ObservationRequest, but rather send a signal to the observatory API to
cancel the request, and set the ObservationRecord's status to 'CANCELED'.
Let me know if I should open a separate issue on this.
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#746 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ACPJA3AVOREFIUNDF43D6NDYJOFCRAVCNFSM6AAAAAA7O6TYY6VHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMYTQNJWHE4DAMJXGU>
.
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.Message
ID: ***@***.***>
|
Great, I made a separate issue, #786. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm not sure I understand everything you are going for here.
Specifically, the code in tom_common.utils seems strange to me.
It seems like all of this work should be done in the Model?
It's not clear to me why adding the data_product.data.delete() and the data_product.thumbnail.delete() to an extended DataProduct.delete() in the model wouldn't accomplish all of this through cascades.
Is there something I'm missing?
This PR introduces a new feature for deleting observations and their associated data products, responding to user feedback within our project. It also addresses a oversight made by my previous PR that prevented the deletion of thumbnails for a dataproduct, ensuring a more comprehensive cleanup process.
A new template has been added to streamline the observation deletion process. Tests are added and confirm that observations and related data products are thoroughly deleted. Additionally, a deletion button has been integrated into the observation detail view for user convenience.
I believe these enhancements could benefit the
TOMToolkitcommunity. However, I understand and respect if this functionality does not align with current priorities.