This repository has been archived by the owner on Nov 25, 2024. It is now read-only.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
State storage refactor #1839
State storage refactor #1839
Changes from all commits
c617d7c
dc056f7
f858b5a
5475f8a
8859e0e
cdf8126
0f84928
beef1e3
e5b4e75
121f197
92ea4e5
e1902ae
42b3dc5
efec056
ad66f9e
fc1d6bc
94f3de2
8d05305
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
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.
Shouldn't we use an
ORDER BY
here to ensure we are getting the same ordering each time we do this?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 don't think it really matters. We end up sorting the NIDs in Go anyway, and since the migration transaction only gets committed if the entire thing succeeds, we don't really need to care about the ordering that the migration runs in.