Use `(a, b, c) = ($1, $2, $3)` for the object stream location
arguments rather than combining multiple AND queries together.
Using a tuple comparison is shorter and also easier to see which
object is selected.
Change-Id: Iba84b89630d57255023c30e309eb6afaee9ab944
While deleting bucket we need also to delete pending objects from
pending_objects table.
Part of https://github.com/storj/storj/issues/6048
Change-Id: Icc83eaecf8388704e0b6329c397e8028debcf672
With this change we are removing code responsible to handle deleting
bucket and supporting server side copies created with references. In practice we are restoring delete queries that we had before server side copy implementation (with small exception, see bellow).
From deletion queries we are also removing parts with segment metadata
as result because we are not longer sending explicit delete requests to
storage nodes.
https://github.com/storj/storj/issues/5891
Change-Id: If866d9f3a1b01e9ebd9b49c4740a6425ba06dd43
We decided that we will stop sending explicit delete requests to nodes
and we will cleanup deleted with GC instead.
https://github.com/storj/storj/issues/5888
Change-Id: I65a308cca6fb17e97e3ba85eb3212584c96a32cd
Split out the function to delete a batch of objects from a bucket, so
that we get metrics which give a rough indication how long this operation
takes.
Part of https://github.com/storj/storj/issues/4957
Change-Id: I20a4ed5894217f4cd0b2f25aee297f0ecda57ab5
Use the same query when deleting a single object or multiple.
I have chosen not to deduplicate the row "scan" logic because
it is less complicated code and this change would expand to other
parts of the codebase.
Part of https://github.com/storj/storj/issues/4700
Change-Id: I7a958c78c903b2bddd72ca217971f7e8e02a0d0c
When deleting a bucket, make sure that object copies in other buckets are
promoted to new ancestor and left in a working state.
Closes https://github.com/storj/storj/issues/4591
Change-Id: I019d916cd6de5ed51dd0dd25f47c35d0ec666af6
To optimize memory consumption we where consuming
segment data during processing results from delete
query. Turns out that there is a chance that query will be
rolled-back if something will go wrong while reading
results. In such case its possible to delete pices but
object/segment will be still in DB.
This change removed piece deletion from problematic
place. Pieces are still deleted in batches but are not
limited at the moment. To avoid memory issues object
deletion batch was decreased.
Change-Id: Icb3667220f9c25f64b73cf71d0cf3fdc7e5107c5
In case when number of deleted segments in a single
batch was multiplication of opts.DeletePiecesBatchSize it
was possible to finish deletion of objects to early.
Change-Id: I9181d4a3c64053d9df46a11a6e0cd22153c73ee9
It turns out that some DB methods are not
passing context to to lower levels even if have
context as a parameter.
Change-Id: I82f4fc1a47c362687a91364d85e4468057e53134
It's possible that single object will have a lot of segments and
at the moment we are trying to collect all pieces at once and
send to storage nodes information about deletion. Such
approach my lead to using extensive amount of memory. This
change is handling this problem by calling DeletePieces
function multiple times with only part of pieces to delete for
a single call.
Change-Id: Ie1e66cd9d86d130eb89a61cf6e23f38b8cb8859e
Currently it's difficult to gather how many objects and segments are
being inserted. Adding separate monitoring counters make this easier.
Change-Id: I986cd82f03e99d2aa6fc76028255ee1090d1b294
Currently we were duplicating code for AS OF SYSTEM TIME in several
places. This replaces the code with using a method on
dbutil.Implementation.
As a consequence it's more useful to use a shorter name for
implementation - 'impl' should be sufficiently clear in the context.
Similarly, using AsOfSystemInterval and AsOfSystemTime to distinguish
between the two modes is useful and slightly shorter without causing
confusion.
Change-Id: Idefe55528efa758b6176591017b6572a8d443e3d
Initially we duplicated the code to avoid large scale changes to
the packages. Now we are past metainfo refactor we can remove the
duplication.
Change-Id: I9d0b2756cc6e2a2f4d576afa408a15273a7e1cef
metabase has become a central concept and it's more suitable for it to
be directly nested under satellite rather than being part of metainfo.
metainfo is going to be the "endpoint" logic for handling requests.
Change-Id: I53770d6761ac1e9a1283b5aa68f471b21e784198
