Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
- Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 6.3k
Git LFS lock api#2938
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
Git LFS lock api #2938
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Conversation
9458fea to 744a07eComparecodecov-io commented Nov 22, 2017 • edited
Loading Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
edited
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@## master #2938 +/- ## ========================================= + Coverage 32.73% 33.03% +0.3% ========================================= Files 267 269 +2 Lines 39189 39483 +294 ========================================= + Hits 12828 13044 +216 - Misses 24539 24593 +54 - Partials 1822 1846 +24
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
sapk commented Nov 22, 2017 • edited
Loading Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
edited
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
It is ready for review. |
models/lfs_lock.go Outdated
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
... 2017 The Gitea ... ?
models/lfs_lock.go Outdated
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
wrong order
models/lfs_lock.go Outdated
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
lfock -> lock
models/lfs_lock.go Outdated
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Use created is enough, then line 28 -> 30 and line 36 could be removed.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I base myself on other models like :
gitea/models/issue_stopwatch.go
Line 24 in a8717e5
| s.CreatedUnix=time.Now().Unix() |
After review more of those, I might be needed adding
xorm:"INDEX created" on created like :Line 23 in aa962de
| CreatedUnixint64`xorm:"INDEX created"` |
After adding that, does I need ?
Line 32 in aa962de
| t.Created=time.Unix(t.CreatedUnix, 0).Local() |
I will totally follow you on xorm since you will know more about it and maybe (in another PR) we should clean other models with such pattern.
models/lfs_lock.go Outdated
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
maybe store a lower column?
models/lfs_lock.go Outdated
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
IsLFSLockExist has been invoked on GetLFSLock.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@lunny To be sure, I would better use directly GetLFSLock and check if !IsErrLFSLockNotExist(err) ?
models/lfs_lock.go Outdated
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
return
Save a little of memory and cpu time.
| RepoID int64 `xorm:"INDEX"` | ||
| Owner *User `xorm:"-"` | ||
| OwnerID int64 `xorm:"INDEX"` | ||
| Path string `xorm:"TEXT"` |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
And maybe Path should be unique with RepoID ?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yes and that make me think that I should also use filepath.Clean before adding a entry.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Done + add not null constraint
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Revert back the uniqueness since mysql need a fixed size to index uniquess on field and path is a TEXT field. Uniqueness is preserve by code.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Path could be xorm:"varchar(1024)".
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
after looking at it linux limits path length to 4096
lunny commented Nov 28, 2017
LGTM |
lafriks commented Nov 28, 2017
@sapk please resolve vendor conflict |
sapk commented Nov 28, 2017
@lafriks done |
lafriks commented Nov 28, 2017
LGTM |
Resolve#2725