Skip to content

Comments

refactor!: Remove stat_has_xxx and list_has_xxx#6313

Merged
Xuanwo merged 1 commit intomainfrom
remove_stat_has
Jun 18, 2025
Merged

refactor!: Remove stat_has_xxx and list_has_xxx#6313
Xuanwo merged 1 commit intomainfrom
remove_stat_has

Conversation

@Xuanwo
Copy link
Member

@Xuanwo Xuanwo commented Jun 18, 2025

Which issue does this PR close?

As suggested in #5557 (comment)

Rationale for this change

Make code more readable and maintainable.

What changes are included in this PR?

Remove all stat_has_xxx and list_has_xxx fields.

Are there any user-facing changes?

Capability removed.

@dosubot dosubot bot added the size:L This PR changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files. label Jun 18, 2025
@Xuanwo Xuanwo requested a review from meteorgan June 18, 2025 12:14
@dosubot dosubot bot added the releases-note/refactor The PR does a refactor on code or has a title that begins with "refactor" label Jun 18, 2025
@Xuanwo Xuanwo merged commit 06370cc into main Jun 18, 2025
358 of 359 checks passed
@Xuanwo Xuanwo deleted the remove_stat_has branch June 18, 2025 12:29
@killme2008
Copy link
Contributor

killme2008 commented Aug 22, 2025

@Xuanwo @yihong0618 GreptimeDB used list_has_content_length to determine whether to call stat again:

https://github.com/GreptimeTeam/greptimedb/blob/d774996e89648dbdf25326cc8440b51847095abb/src/object-store/src/layers/lru_cache/read_cache.rs#L163

Since it’s been removed, is there a replacement API?

Looks like it's always true, so maybe I can just remove this checking.

Thank you.

@Xuanwo
Copy link
Member Author

Xuanwo commented Aug 22, 2025

Since it’s been removed, is there a replacement API?

Looks like it's always true, so maybe I can just remove this checking.

Sorry this change broke your use case. Could you please open a new issue? I believe we can come up with a new design to address it.

@killme2008
Copy link
Contributor

Since it’s been removed, is there a replacement API?
Looks like it's always true, so maybe I can just remove this checking.

Sorry this change broke your use case. Could you please open a new issue? I believe we can come up with a new design to address it.

Sure!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

releases-note/refactor The PR does a refactor on code or has a title that begins with "refactor" size:L This PR changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files.

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants