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

feat: search objects v2 #626

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from
Open

feat: search objects v2 #626

wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

fenos
Copy link
Contributor

@fenos fenos commented Jan 24, 2025

What kind of change does this PR introduce?

Feature

What is the current behavior?

Super slow search functionality when there are millions of objects

What is the new behavior?

Fast, reliable and performant search functionality across hundreds of millions of objects

@fenos fenos force-pushed the feat/list-objects-v2 branch from a5b7fe6 to 96b7825 Compare January 24, 2025 15:11
Copy link

@za-arthur za-arthur left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thank you for the PR. In overall all looks good to me. I just left couple of comments below.

@@ -0,0 +1,3 @@
-- postgres-migrations disable-transaction
CREATE INDEX CONCURRENTLY IF NOT EXISTS "objects_bucket_id_level_idx"

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Do you not create an UNIQUE index here because you want to keep existing UNIQUE index?

@@ -0,0 +1,2 @@
-- postgres-migrations disable-transaction
CREATE UNIQUE INDEX CONCURRENTLY IF NOT EXISTS idx_name_bucket_unique on storage.objects (name COLLATE "C", bucket_id);

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

For the purpose of migration I think the index can be created without COLLATE "C", because the LIKE operator is not used.
But it shouldn't affect anything in terms of performance or functionality, so it is up to you.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants