Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

toggl time entries are limited to 1000 #14

Open
nathaniel-holder opened this issue Apr 7, 2018 · 5 comments
Open

toggl time entries are limited to 1000 #14

nathaniel-holder opened this issue Apr 7, 2018 · 5 comments

Comments

@nathaniel-holder
Copy link

The syncDays configuration value, if set too high, will result in hitting the toggle API limit of only returning 1000 time entries. As the toggl API suggests, a paginated call to the alternate API command detailed report allows for unlimited time log entries.

@christianrondeau
Copy link
Owner

That makes sense, we could do paging but I'm wondering: if you're synchronizing more than a thousand time tracking entries, won't that take forever? Unless you're just trying to do a batch import? I'd like to better understand your use case.

This was not designed for batch importing, but could very well be adapted to be.

@nathaniel-holder
Copy link
Author

nathaniel-holder commented Apr 7, 2018

I set the {{syncDays}} config to something like 365 to account for any manual changes to toggl time entries going back a year. It's an unlikely scenario for me, but wanted to allow for back-dated modifications to toggl. The time it takes to run isn't really a problem for me.

My use case only required 10 days of batch syncing, but I definitely see the need for batch import if I had been using toggl for a long time on a Jira project and had been syncing manually and wanted to make sure those work log entries were correct.

@christianrondeau
Copy link
Owner

I understand, that makes sense. This is something we didn't need, but I'd accept a PR if that's useful for you. This being said, the Toggl API submodule is really outdated, so you may need to replace it by HttpClient json calls.

@nathaniel-holder
Copy link
Author

Thanks, I probably won't get to it any time soon.

@christianrondeau
Copy link
Owner

Me neither ;)

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

No branches or pull requests

2 participants