Record transfer limit for data refresh

[AetherUnbound]

Fixes

Fixes #472 by @AetherUnbound

Description

This PR adds a new variable, DATA_REFRESH_LIMIT, and some additional logic for interpreting an appropriate limit based on the environment the ingestion server is deployed in. In prod or production, the default limit is removed and all records are copied. In any other environment, at most 100k records are copied by default (although more or fewer can be specified using the aforementioned environment variable).

I also split the unit tests up and added tests for the altered query. This was a huge pain, because trying to convert the psycopg2.SQL objects into strings requires a database connection which is way too much overhead for such a simple test.

Testing Instructions

just ing-testlocal

Checklist

• My pull request has a descriptive title (not a vague title like Update index.md).
• My pull request targets the default branch of the repository (main) or a parent feature branch.
• My commit messages follow best practices.
• My code follows the established code style of the repository.
• I added or updated tests for the changes I made (if applicable).
• I added or updated documentation (if applicable).
• I tried running the project locally and verified that there are no visible errors.

Developer Certificate of Origin

Developer Certificate of Origin

Developer Certificate of Origin
Version 1.1

Copyright (C) 2004, 2006 The Linux Foundation and its contributors.
1 Letterman Drive
Suite D4700
San Francisco, CA, 94129

Everyone is permitted to copy and distribute verbatim copies of this
license document, but changing it is not allowed.


Developer's Certificate of Origin 1.1

By making a contribution to this project, I certify that:

(a) The contribution was created in whole or in part by me and I
    have the right to submit it under the open source license
    indicated in the file; or

(b) The contribution is based upon previous work that, to the best
    of my knowledge, is covered under an appropriate open source
    license and I have the right under that license to submit that
    work with modifications, whether created in whole or in part
    by me, under the same open source license (unless I am
    permitted to submit under a different license), as indicated
    in the file; or

(c) The contribution was provided directly to me by some other
    person who certified (a), (b) or (c) and I have not modified
    it.

(d) I understand and agree that this project and the contribution
    are public and that a record of the contribution (including all
    personal information I submit with it, including my sign-off) is
    maintained indefinitely and may be redistributed consistent with
    this project or the open source license(s) involved.

[dhruvkb]

LGTM, except a note for the future.

[dhruvkb]

We should settle on one of these in the future.

[AetherUnbound]

Agreed, just trying to cover all my bases 😅 We've had some discussion about local as well in #475, I'll make an issue for unifying this everywhere.

[zackkrida]

Again, not the biggest 🐍 python authority but the code makes sense and I don't see any issues. Nice!

[AetherUnbound]

So I ran into that issue where it hangs on the cleaning step again, and I was able to resolve it by removing the garbage collection steps 🙃 I'll have to do a deep dive on that at some point