Batch tokens deletion in cleartokens command

[merito]

Fixes #651

Description of the Change

Use batches when deleting expired tokens using cleartokens management command. Introduce two setting variables to configure batch size and interval between deletions. The defaults were tested on quite weak machines and ~1.5M deleted tokens. It allows to run cleartokens without any downtime.

Checklist

• PR only contains one change (considered splitting up PR)
• unit-test added
• documentation updated
• CHANGELOG.md updated (only for user relevant changes)
• author name in AUTHORS

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #969 (725c3c9) into master (e4c98c7) will increase coverage by 0.03%.
The diff coverage is 100.00%.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master     #969      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   96.64%   96.67%   +0.03%     
==========================================
  Files          31       31              
  Lines        1756     1775      +19     
==========================================
+ Hits         1697     1716      +19     
  Misses         59       59              

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
oauth2_provider/settings.py	100.00% <ø> (ø)
oauth2_provider/models.py	98.76% <100.00%> (+0.07%)	⬆️

---

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update e4c98c7...725c3c9. Read the comment docs.

[auvipy]

unit and integration tests for the changed logics are needed. also need explanation why atomic transacion is not needed here.

[MattBlack85]

I am a bit worried about the performance that this may have on large postrgesql databases because of the .count() and id__in, can we measure and report a run against a big table to see how it performs?

[merito]

I am a bit worried about the performance that this may have on large postrgesql databases because of the .count() and id__in, can we measure and report a run against a big table to see how it performs?

Note: If you only need to determine the number of records in the set (and don’t need the actual objects), it’s much more efficient to handle a count at the database level using SQL’s SELECT COUNT(*). Django provides a count() method for precisely this reason.

source: https://docs.djangoproject.com/en/3.2/ref/models/querysets/#when-querysets-are-evaluated

Performance is the reason why this PR emerges. I've tried to remove ~1.5M of stale tokens and I've failed because very high RAM usage. When I'd introduced batching it passed without any peaks in resources of machine on postgres installed on very basic AWS instance. Because AccessToken model is simple the default 10000 items batch size is the best balance between speed and low resource usage.

[n2ygk]

Sorry for the delayed follow up on this PR. It looks good. Please rebase and resolve conflicts. I'm targeting the next minor release for this. Thanks! (I'm afraid to check our production DB to see how many expired tokens are in it;-)

[merito]

I had to exclude AUTHORS from check-merge-conflict, because it causes

Check for merge conflicts................................................Failed
- hook id: check-merge-conflict
- exit code: 1

Merge conflict string "=======
" found in AUTHORS:2

You can keep this change or change separator in AUTHORS file.

[n2ygk]

I think I'll approach this by fixing AUTHORS separately as the problem doesn't "belong" to this PR.

Also, since I'm targeting 1.7.0 for this as it's more than a patch, let's hold it off a bit until 1.6.1. gets published.

[n2ygk]

pre-commit/pre-commit-hooks#100 describes the problems with RST underline.

change made but not marked resolved.

[n2ygk]

@auvipy no test existed prior to this PR so let's accept it as is and put writing a test for the command on the backlog.

[n2ygk]

@merito Sorry this is after the fact but wouldn't a default value of 0 be best, especially since the sleep is always executed even if the batch is tiny.
https://github.com/merito/django-oauth-toolkit/blob/725c3c9d8927379c9808abd1badb4fcd9ff1cbaa/oauth2_provider/models.py#L636