Gist PR Request: Fixing VA.gov Pega File Status Errors

This article details a request for a Pull Request (PR) on a Gist related to resolving an issue with file processing between the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) and its downstream partner, Pega. This issue arose from a new feature that sent an additional file to Pega, causing discrepancies in the file processing status and leading to false error alerts. Understanding the problem and the proposed solution is crucial for maintaining the smooth operation of the VA's systems and ensuring accurate data processing.

Background of the Pega File Processing Issue

On a Tuesday, the Health Applications team implemented a new feature that introduced an additional file to the data stream sent to Pega. The VA's workflow with Pega involves a callback mechanism, where Pega reports the files it has received. However, the new file was not included in this reporting list. Consequently, the VA's database was not marking the new file as 'processed,' resulting in a surge of false error alerts. It was confirmed that the file was indeed being delivered to Pega, but the lack of status updates in the VA's system triggered these erroneous alerts. This discrepancy threatened to disrupt normal operations and required immediate attention.

Impact of the File Processing Errors

The false error alerts generated by this issue had several significant impacts. Firstly, they created unnecessary noise for the support teams, diverting their attention from genuine problems. Secondly, these alerts triggered false ZSF emails, which could lead to confusion and potentially delay the processing of legitimate issues. The primary concern was the potential disruption to the accurate and timely processing of veterans' health-related data. To mitigate these impacts, a swift and effective solution was necessary. This solution needed to address the immediate problem of the false alerts and prevent future occurrences.

Initial Steps Taken to Address the Issue

To address the problem, a fix was deployed to production on the same day the issue was identified. This fix aimed to prevent future misreporting of the new file's status. However, the alerts continued to fire because the pega_status field for existing submissions had not been manually updated. To resolve this, the pega_status field needed to be manually assigned a non-nil value for the affected records. This meant that the records had to be updated directly in the database, a task that required careful execution and appropriate approvals. The urgency of the situation prompted the creation of a database command to clear these records and stop the alerts.

The Proposed Solution: A Database Command

To resolve the issue, a database command was created to clear the affected records. This command is designed to specifically target records with a matching file name to the new file that was not being reported back by Pega. The command filters these records further, selecting only those with a nil status. This ensures that the command does not impact records saved after the fix was deployed. The command then iteratively updates the status of these records, effectively clearing them and preventing further false alerts. This targeted approach minimizes the risk of unintended consequences while addressing the immediate problem.

Details of the Database Command

The database command essentially performs the following steps:

1. Identify Affected Records: It identifies records with file names matching the new file that Pega was not reporting.
2. Filter by Status: It filters these records to include only those with a nil status, ensuring that only the problematic records are targeted.
3. Update Status: It iteratively updates the status of these records to a non-nil value, marking them as processed.

This process effectively clears the records and prevents the alerts from firing, thereby stopping the flow of false ZSF emails. The command was carefully designed to be precise and minimize the risk of impacting unrelated data. The iterative update approach was chosen to ensure that the database operations were performed safely and efficiently.

Securing Approval for the Database Command

Before executing the database command, it was essential to secure the necessary approvals. Adrian Rollet, a member of the team, confirmed that he would run the code in a rails console with prior backend approval. This step is crucial to ensure that the database update is performed safely and in accordance with the VA's protocols. The request for approval was made in a support thread, ensuring that the relevant stakeholders were aware of the situation and the proposed solution. This process highlights the VA's commitment to data integrity and the importance of following established procedures.

The Gist: A Central Resource for the Solution

A Gist, a simple way to share code snippets and files on GitHub, was created to centralize the database command and related information. The Gist, located at https://gist.github.com/brostk/3dbee8507ffad63e829ca23815a4065e, serves as a reference point for the team. It allows for easy access and review of the code, ensuring transparency and collaboration. The use of a Gist facilitates the sharing and implementation of the solution, streamlining the process of resolving the issue.

Contents of the Gist

The Gist contains the following key elements:

• The complete database command required to clear the affected records.
• A description of the command's purpose and functionality.
• Any relevant notes or instructions for executing the command.

By providing a clear and concise resource, the Gist ensures that the database update can be performed accurately and efficiently. It also serves as a valuable reference for future similar issues, promoting knowledge sharing and continuous improvement.

Seeking a Pull Request (PR) for the Gist

The primary purpose of this article is to seek a Pull Request (PR) for the Gist. A PR is a mechanism for suggesting changes to a repository, in this case, the Gist. By requesting a PR, the team aims to ensure that the solution is thoroughly reviewed and validated before implementation. This review process helps to identify potential issues or improvements, ensuring the robustness and effectiveness of the solution. The PR process also promotes collaboration and knowledge sharing among team members.

Implications and Preventative Measures

The Pega file processing issue highlights the importance of robust monitoring and alerting systems. While the immediate problem was addressed by updating the database, it is crucial to implement preventative measures to avoid similar issues in the future. This includes ensuring that all new files and data streams are properly integrated into the reporting mechanisms and that alerts are configured to accurately reflect the status of file processing. Additionally, regular audits of the data processing workflows can help to identify and address potential vulnerabilities before they lead to problems.

Improving Monitoring and Alerting Systems

To prevent future incidents, the VA should consider the following improvements to its monitoring and alerting systems:

• Comprehensive File Tracking: Implement a system that tracks all files sent to downstream partners, ensuring that their processing status is accurately reported.
• Adaptive Alerting: Configure alerts to be more adaptive and context-aware, reducing the likelihood of false positives.
• Regular Audits: Conduct regular audits of data processing workflows to identify and address potential issues proactively.

By implementing these measures, the VA can enhance the reliability and accuracy of its data processing systems, reducing the risk of disruptions and ensuring the timely delivery of services to veterans.

Long-Term Solutions for Data Processing

In addition to immediate fixes and improved monitoring, long-term solutions for data processing should be considered. This may involve upgrading the existing systems, adopting new technologies, or streamlining the data processing workflows. Investing in these long-term solutions can improve the efficiency and scalability of the VA's systems, enabling them to better serve the needs of veterans. A strategic approach to data processing is essential for ensuring the VA's continued success in delivering high-quality services.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the request for a PR on the Gist is a critical step in resolving the Pega file processing issue. The proposed database command offers a targeted solution to clear the affected records and prevent false alerts. Securing approval and implementing preventative measures are essential for ensuring the integrity and reliability of the VA's data processing systems. By addressing this issue effectively, the VA can maintain its commitment to providing timely and accurate services to veterans. The collaboration and attention to detail demonstrated in this process highlight the VA's dedication to continuous improvement and excellence. The requested PR will facilitate a thorough review and validation of the solution, ensuring its effectiveness and promoting knowledge sharing among team members. You can find more about Pull Requests on GitHub in this article.