Improve searching in the userdir #4846
Conversation
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## develop #4846 +/- ##
===========================================
- Coverage 75.31% 74.96% -0.35%
===========================================
Files 340 340
Lines 34924 35221 +297
Branches 5718 5824 +106
===========================================
+ Hits 26302 26404 +102
- Misses 7009 7179 +170
- Partials 1613 1638 +25 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Can you please talk me through why we need both users_who_share_public_rooms and users_in_public_rooms? Do we still want to have users_who_share_public_rooms, users_who_share_private_rooms and users_in_public_rooms? I'm broadly very confused what those changes are giving us, and why we need to recalculate everything from scratch
|
@erikjohnston wrt why we have in public and in private rooms: #4833 (comment) I'd like to get rid of the cross product of those sharing public rooms, but then we'd need to come up with a new way of figuring out how to tell if we need to purge remote users from the user directory. |
|
Don't we already have a |
|
@erikjohnston yes, but it had some incredibly weird "last room" room ID. |
|
|
||
| return self.runInteraction( | ||
| "add_users_who_share_room", _add_users_who_share_room_txn | ||
| ) | ||
|
|
||
| def add_users_in_public_rooms(self, room_id, user_ids): | ||
| """Insert entries into the users_who_share_private_rooms table. The first | ||
| user should be a local user. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We don't seem to handle the first user in any special way?
Fixes #4833