Skip to content
This repository has been archived by the owner on Nov 15, 2023. It is now read-only.

Store the database in a role specific subdirectory #9645

Merged
6 commits merged into from
Sep 7, 2021
Merged

Store the database in a role specific subdirectory #9645

6 commits merged into from
Sep 7, 2021

Conversation

hirschenberger
Copy link
Contributor

This is a cleaned up version of #8658 fixing #6880

polkadot companion: paritytech/polkadot#2923

@hirschenberger hirschenberger mentioned this pull request Aug 28, 2021
Closed
1 task
@hirschenberger hirschenberger mentioned this pull request Sep 1, 2021
Closed
@apopiak apopiak added the A0-please_review Pull request needs code review. label Sep 1, 2021
cheme
cheme reviewed Sep 1, 2021
View reviewed changes
client/db/src/utils.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
client/db/src/utils.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
cheme
cheme reviewed Sep 6, 2021
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@cheme cheme left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks good to me.
It needs to be merge with master though for ci to pass.
The migration will not work for parity_db (no 'db_version' file but 'metadata' can be use).

@hirschenberger
Copy link
Contributor Author

Don't know what's the problem with the companion?

@cheme
Copy link
Contributor

cheme commented Sep 6, 2021

Don't know what's the problem with the companion?

Probably need merge with master

@hirschenberger
Copy link
Contributor Author

Don't know what's the problem with the companion?

Probably need merge with master

I just did merge but after the commit here, can you rerun the pipline here?

@cheme cheme added B5-clientnoteworthy C1-low PR touches the given topic and has a low impact on builders. D2-notlive 💤 PR contains changes in a runtime directory that is not deployed to a chain that requires an audit. labels Sep 6, 2021
cheme
cheme approved these changes Sep 6, 2021
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@cheme cheme left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM

@cheme cheme requested a review from arkpar September 6, 2021 17:00
@ordian ordian mentioned this pull request Sep 7, 2021
Merged
@ordian ordian linked an issue Sep 7, 2021 that may be closed by this pull request
Allow full and light client on-disk databases to co-exist #6880
Closed
@ordian
Copy link
Member

ordian commented Sep 7, 2021

bot merge

@ghost
Copy link

ghost commented Sep 7, 2021

Trying merge.

@ghost ghost merged commit 6e15de9 into paritytech:master Sep 7, 2021
@emostov emostov mentioned this pull request Sep 9, 2021
Closed
@github-actions github-actions bot mentioned this pull request Oct 11, 2021
Closed
This pull request was closed.
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Reviewers

@cheme cheme cheme approved these changes

@arkpar arkpar arkpar approved these changes

@bkchr bkchr Awaiting requested review from bkchr

@gnunicorn gnunicorn Awaiting requested review from gnunicorn

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
A0-please_review Pull request needs code review. C1-low PR touches the given topic and has a low impact on builders. D2-notlive 💤 PR contains changes in a runtime directory that is not deployed to a chain that requires an audit.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Allow full and light client on-disk databases to co-exist
5 participants
@hirschenberger @cheme @ordian @arkpar @apopiak