Added omitempty to storage structs
#401
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
|
My bad, I forgot to run tests and it appears some test expects the missing fields to exist. |
This significantly cuts down the size of the marshaled JSON. I've left it out on fields that, in my experience, never have the default value.
|
This looks good to me, thank you @snej! Apologies for the long wait. |
mochi-co
approved these changes
May 19, 2024
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Adding
omitemptyto the JSON metadata of thestoragestruct fields significantly cuts down the size of the marshaled JSON when a hook is persisting state to a database.I've left it out on fields that, in my experience, never have the default value; but if you feel it should be consistent on all fields, I can add it to the rest.