Closed chrisjsewell closed 3 years ago
Merging #114 (848a95b) into develop (c0a67a3) will decrease coverage by
0.12%
. The diff coverage is97.50%
.
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## develop #114 +/- ##
===========================================
- Coverage 99.68% 99.56% -0.13%
===========================================
Files 7 7
Lines 1585 1601 +16
===========================================
+ Hits 1580 1594 +14
- Misses 5 7 +2
Impacted Files | Coverage Δ | |
---|---|---|
disk_objectstore/container.py | 99.39% <95.34%> (-0.25%) |
:arrow_down: |
disk_objectstore/database.py | 100.00% <100.00%> (ø) |
|
disk_objectstore/utils.py | 99.60% <100.00%> (-0.01%) |
:arrow_down: |
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact)
,ø = not affected
,? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update c0a67a3...848a95b. Read the comment docs.
Cheers!
Currently based on top of #113, supersedes #108Following migration: https://docs.sqlalchemy.org/en/14/changelog/migration_20.html
SQLALCHEMY_WARN_20
environmental variablefuture=True
for engine and session creation (V1 -> v2 API)query
->select
(V1 -> v2 API)models.py
->database.py
(models is too generic does not describe the module's purpose)get_session
->database.py
(this method can be independent of the container)I noted the
count()
method is now a bit more complex, but this is explained in: https://github.com/sqlalchemy/sqlalchemy/issues/6794A few things to double-check:
[x] A number of queries used
with_entities
, but I was unclear why this was necessary, i.e. I changedquery(Obj)...with_entities(Obj.hashkey)
toselect(Obj.hashkey)..
@giovannipizzi any reason why this would be an issue?[x] Vacuum now fails, since it is in a transaction. I've added a workaround, but checked on this in: https://github.com/sqlalchemy/sqlalchemy/discussions/6959#discussioncomment-1251681