Skip to content

ENG-2737: RequestTask.status refactor#7680

Open
nreyes-dev wants to merge 7 commits intomainfrom
nreyes/eng-2737
Open

ENG-2737: RequestTask.status refactor#7680
nreyes-dev wants to merge 7 commits intomainfrom
nreyes/eng-2737

Conversation

@nreyes-dev
Copy link
Contributor

@nreyes-dev nreyes-dev commented Mar 17, 2026

Ticket ENG-2737

Description Of Changes

The frontend was determining task status (error/polling/awaiting processing) by scanning execution logs returned in the verbose privacy request response. With long-lived polling tasks that produce 50+ execution logs, the 50-log limit could cause a completed task to still appear as "Awaiting Polling" in the UI.

This adds a task_status_by_dataset_name field to the verbose response, populated directly from RequestTask.status. The frontend now reads task status from this field instead of inferring it from execution log history.

Code Changes

  • Added task_status_by_dataset_name helper on PrivacyRequest model — queries RequestTask rows and groups their status by dataset name
  • Added task_status_by_dataset_name to PrivacyRequestVerboseResponse schema
  • Populated the new field in _shared_privacy_request_search when verbose=True
  • Updated usePrivacyRequestEventLogs hook to use the new field for hasPolling, hasError, hasAwaitingProcessing instead of scanning execution logs
  • Added task_status_by_dataset_name to the PrivacyRequestEntity TypeScript type
  • Added backend test covering the new field in the verbose response

Steps to Confirm

  1. Run a privacy request with a polling integration and verify the activity timeline shows correct task status indicators
  2. Confirm the verbose GET /api/v1/privacy-request?verbose=True response includes task_status_by_dataset_name with correct statuses per dataset

Pre-Merge Checklist

  • Issue requirements met
  • All CI pipelines succeeded
  • CHANGELOG.md updated
    • Add a db-migration This indicates that a change includes a database migration label to the entry if your change includes a DB migration
    • Add a high-risk This issue suggests changes that have a high-probability of breaking existing code label to the entry if your change includes a high-risk change (i.e. potential for performance impact or unexpected regression) that should be flagged
    • Updates unreleased work already in Changelog, no new entry necessary
  • UX feedback:
    • All UX related changes have been reviewed by a designer
    • No UX review needed
  • Followup issues:
    • Followup issues created
    • No followup issues
  • Database migrations:
    • Ensure that your downrev is up to date with the latest revision on main
    • Ensure that your downgrade() migration is correct and works
      • If a downgrade migration is not possible for this change, please call this out in the PR description!
    • No migrations
  • Documentation:
    • Documentation complete, PR opened in fidesdocs
    • Documentation issue created in fidesdocs
    • If there are any new client scopes created as part of the pull request, remember to update public-facing documentation that references our scope registry
    • No documentation updates required

@vercel
Copy link
Contributor

vercel bot commented Mar 17, 2026

The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for GitHub.

2 Skipped Deployments
Project Deployment Actions Updated (UTC)
fides-plus-nightly Ignored Ignored Preview Mar 19, 2026 4:35pm
fides-privacy-center Ignored Ignored Mar 19, 2026 4:35pm

Request Review

@nreyes-dev nreyes-dev marked this pull request as ready for review March 18, 2026 17:12
@nreyes-dev nreyes-dev requested review from a team as code owners March 18, 2026 17:12
@nreyes-dev nreyes-dev requested review from adamsachs and speaker-ender and removed request for a team March 18, 2026 17:12
@greptile-apps

This comment was marked as resolved.

@nreyes-dev nreyes-dev changed the title ENG-2737: RequestTask.status refactor WIP ENG-2737: RequestTask.status refactor Mar 18, 2026
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.

1 participant