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

refactor: remove non-shallow getSharesInFolder #44460

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
May 17, 2024

Conversation

icewind1991
Copy link
Member

It is only used in one spot and makes it a lot more complicated to remove the filecache joins.

@icewind1991 icewind1991 added the 3. to review Waiting for reviews label Mar 25, 2024
@icewind1991 icewind1991 added this to the Nextcloud 29 milestone Mar 25, 2024
@icewind1991 icewind1991 requested review from a team, ArtificialOwl, Fenn-CS, sorbaugh, artonge and come-nc and removed request for a team March 25, 2024 16:29
@Altahrim Altahrim mentioned this pull request Mar 26, 2024
@skjnldsv skjnldsv mentioned this pull request Mar 28, 2024
81 tasks
Copy link
Contributor

@come-nc come-nc left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Same question as Louis, but my guess is filtering on node id is enough and checking the storage is redundant?

This was referenced Apr 4, 2024
@blizzz blizzz modified the milestones: Nextcloud 29, Nextcloud 30 Apr 8, 2024
Signed-off-by: Robin Appelman <robin@icewind.nl>
@icewind1991 icewind1991 force-pushed the remove-non-shallow-in-folder branch from 8f14034 to ccd5667 Compare May 1, 2024 14:47
@icewind1991
Copy link
Member Author

Yes, the storage check is redundant with the path branch removed

@icewind1991 icewind1991 merged commit 54afea4 into master May 17, 2024
158 checks passed
@icewind1991 icewind1991 deleted the remove-non-shallow-in-folder branch May 17, 2024 15:41
@blizzz blizzz mentioned this pull request Jul 24, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
3. to review Waiting for reviews
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants