feat(pkg/db): remove cleveldb, fsdb and rocksdb #1714
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This reverts commit e328b31.
thehowl
requested review from
moul,
a team,
gfanton,
jaekwon,
piux2 and
zivkovicmilos
as code owners
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #1714 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 47.00% 47.20% +0.19%
==========================================
Files 578 575 -3
Lines 77582 77092 -490
==========================================
- Hits 36471 36393 -78
+ Misses 38076 37666 -410
+ Partials 3035 3033 -2
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more. ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
ajnavarro
approved these changes
Mar 4, 2024
|
From the review meeting: let's keep one additional implementation aside from the ones that are currently used. For what @ajnavarro was referring to, we can support functionality of specific databases by adding extra methods, and then using type assertions in usage to verify if they support that (this would likely have to be done anyway, even if we keep as it is now only goleveldb and memdb.) I will update the PR and add support boltdb |
3 tasks
thehowl
changed the title
|
This PR is now updated, and ready for a last review before merging. |
leohhhn
pushed a commit
to leohhhn/gno
that referenced
this pull request
May 21, 2024
Split from gnolang#1602. Context: > @zivkovicmilos:[^1] Unpopular opinion: we should probably just drop these DBs entirely from the codebase, they are never gonna be used in place of LevelDB in the near future > > @ajnavarro: IMHO the needed database is defined by the application needs, not from any other external usecases. Sticking to one of the existing key/value databases, we can use their special capabilities to make it more performant for our use case (yes, even if they are all key/value DBs, they differ in a lot of low-level functionality). \ > I would say to use one and add support in the future for more if needed. After a discussion in the review meeting w/ @jaekwon, this PR is now changed to maintain another reference implementation with boltdb. It also makes sure that it is selectable, when available, from the tm2 node configuration. After this PR, there are no databases in the codebase using cgo. [^1]: gnolang#1602 (comment)
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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.
Split from #1602. Context:
After a discussion in the review meeting w/ @jaekwon, this PR is now changed to maintain another reference implementation with boltdb. It also makes sure that it is selectable, when available, from the tm2 node configuration.
After this PR, there are no databases in the codebase using cgo.
Footnotes
https://github.com/gnolang/gno/pull/1602#discussion_r1490862277 ↩