What to do with deprecation notices?

[danielabc (Daniela)]

Why are these notices sent to me? How to proceed?

Deprecation notice: `SiteSetting.min_trust_to_create_tag` has been deprecated. Please use `SiteSetting.create_tag_allowed_groups` instead. (removal in Discourse 3.3) 
At /var/www/discourse/lib/guardian/tag_guardian.rb:12:in `can_create_tag?`

Deprecation notice: `SiteSetting.min_trust_to_edit_post` has been deprecated. Please use `SiteSetting.edit_post_allowed_groups` instead. (removal in Discourse 3.3) 
At /var/www/discourse/lib/guardian/post_guardian.rb:375:in `trusted_with_edits?`

Deprecation notice: `SiteSetting.min_trust_level_to_allow_ignore` has been deprecated. Please use `SiteSetting.ignore_allowed_groups` instead. (removal in Discourse 3.3) 
At /var/www/discourse/lib/guardian.rb:560:in `can_ignore_users?`

[jericson (Jon Ericson)]

I believe these are caused by:

Changes coming to settings for giving access to features (from trust levels to groups)

Many features in Discourse rely on a setting to give access by trust level. This has proven to be too inflexible over the years, so we are moving to a new practice of giving access to members of specific groups instead. We will now begin moving existing settings relying on trust levels so they instead rely on groups - see the list below that we are targeting. Some settings will remain trust level based where it makes sense. As we move along we will update the list and add replies here. Do let u…

It doesn’t hurt to ignore them:

SiteSetting.anonymous_posting min trust level has been deprecated

It’s a deprecation notice and shouldn’t do any harm. As Arkshine says, it’s connected to the move over to more group-enabled style settings, so you will likely see more as that effort continues.

I’m not sure how to turn off the notice. Maybe revert to the default value after checking to make sure the new group-based setting is correct?

[JammyDodger]

Yeah, those deprecation notices you see in the browser console are mainly for developers so you can safely ignore them.

[danielabc (Daniela)]

Can I totally ignore it then? I was worried that something would happen

There are these others that I have no idea what they are, I searched here on the forum but I couldn’t find a solution.

Sidekiq is consuming too much memory (using: 506.27M) for 'dex-forum.com', restarting

Detected rogue Sidekiq pid 3831279 mem 525602816, killing

Authentication failure! request_error: OAuth::Unauthorized, 403 Forbidden

Deprecation notice: Array types for custom fields are deprecated, use type :json instead (removal in Discourse 3.3.0)
At /var/www/discourse/lib/plugin/instance.rb:573:in block in register_topic_custom_field_type

[RBoy]

@danielabc

Sidekiq is consuming too much memory

See this

Sidekiq is consuming too much memory

Since updating to latest yesterday I’ve been seeing this error in the logs constantly. My server has 8gb of ram and only 60% used. I tried running discourse-setup to reset my settings, which gave me this: setting db_shared_buffers = 2048MB setting UNICORN_WORKERS = 4 Logs: Message (781 copies reported) Sidekiq is consuming too much memory (using: 510.87M) for 'community.naturephotographers.network', restarting Backtrace config/unicorn.conf.rb:164:in `check_sidekiq_heartbeat' config/unicorn…

Sidekiq is consuming too much memory even with UNICORN_SIDEKIQ_MAX_RSS adjusted

Continuing the discussion from Sidekiq is consuming too much memory, restarting: I’ve adjusted the setting and see this in the container: root@ip-10-4-2-52:/# set|grep SIDE UNICORN_SIDEKIQS=1 UNICORN_SIDEKIQ_MAX_RSS=1000 But I see this in the logs: Sidekiq is consuming too much memory (using: 535.10M) for 'site', restarting It would seem like 535.10M < 1000, right? I feel like I must have a typo or something else really silly. This is a very busy site with 600-800K pageviews/day with 7 (l…

[Arkshine]

@danielabc

Can I totally ignore it then?

Yes, you can.