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

fix: remove storage service abstraction #530

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Feb 25, 2025
Merged

Conversation

joseph-sentry
Copy link
Contributor

the goal of the storage service was to wrap the old minio storage service with 2 methods for creating and getting presigned urls. it did this by accessing the inner minio client of that service.

i don't think we need this, we can instead have the minio storage and new minio storage services implement the same functionality and have that interface encoded as a new ABC.

so this commit removes the storage service, creates a new ABC, inherits that ABC in the minio storage services, then has the archive service to use the minio storage services directly

the goal of the storage service was to wrap the old minio storage
service with 2 methods for creating and getting presigned urls. it did
this by accessing the inner minio client of that service.

i don't think we need this, we can instead have the minio storage
and new minio storage services implement the same functionality and
have that interface encoded as a new ABC.

so this commit removes the storage service, creates a new ABC,
inherits that ABC in the minio storage services, then has the archive
service to use the minio storage services directly
Copy link

codspeed-hq bot commented Feb 24, 2025

CodSpeed Performance Report

Merging #530 will create unknown performance changes

Comparing joseph/fix-storage (37d9caa) with main (47fa7fd)

Summary

⚠️ No benchmarks were detected in both the base of the PR and the PR.\

@joseph-sentry joseph-sentry requested a review from a team February 24, 2025 15:06
Copy link
Contributor

@Swatinem Swatinem left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

lgtm. I hope we can further clean up all that stuff once we have this successfully rolled out.

Ideally we would merge this with the ArchiveService in worker to just have a single one, and also with a single storage backend (or two, the second one being MemoryStorage for testing)

@joseph-sentry joseph-sentry added this pull request to the merge queue Feb 25, 2025
Merged via the queue into main with commit 0222015 Feb 25, 2025
8 checks passed
@joseph-sentry joseph-sentry deleted the joseph/fix-storage branch February 25, 2025 16:01
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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants