You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
I've considered adding a new retention variable, SNAZZER_RECENTS_TO_KEEP - a linear number of snapshots to retain. But this would still be a "minimum" type policy, just like the other _TO_KEEP variables. Instead, the user-submitted bug report probably desires a SNAZZER_MAX_SNAPSHOTS_TO_KEEP. Which is probably worth implementing, but I should fix the existing confusing behaviour first, because I suspect the desire for this feature is partly driven by the existing surprising behaviour (failure to prune snapshots when there's not many snapshots in the beginning of a deployment).
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
This bug item is pretty much to address https://github.com/csirac2/snazzer/blob/master/doc/snazzer-prune-candidates.md#bugs-and-limitations "When some datetimes are close together, they mightn't be pruned"
I've considered adding a new retention variable, SNAZZER_RECENTS_TO_KEEP - a linear number of snapshots to retain. But this would still be a "minimum" type policy, just like the other _TO_KEEP variables. Instead, the user-submitted bug report probably desires a SNAZZER_MAX_SNAPSHOTS_TO_KEEP. Which is probably worth implementing, but I should fix the existing confusing behaviour first, because I suspect the desire for this feature is partly driven by the existing surprising behaviour (failure to prune snapshots when there's not many snapshots in the beginning of a deployment).
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: