|
|
|
// Copyright 2023 The Gitea Authors. All rights reserved.
|
|
|
|
// SPDX-License-Identifier: MIT
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
package repo
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
import (
|
|
|
|
"net/http"
|
|
|
|
|
Move issue pin to an standalone table for querying performance (#33452)
Noticed a SQL in gitea.com has a bigger load. It seems both `is_pull`
and `pin_order` are not indexed columns in the database.
```SQL
SELECT `id`, `repo_id`, `index`, `poster_id`, `original_author`, `original_author_id`, `name`, `content`, `content_version`, `milestone_id`, `priority`, `is_closed`, `is_pull`, `num_comments`, `ref`, `pin_order`, `deadline_unix`, `created_unix`, `updated_unix`, `closed_unix`, `is_locked`, `time_estimate` FROM `issue` WHERE (repo_id =?) AND (is_pull = 0) AND (pin_order > 0) ORDER BY pin_order
```
I came across a comment
https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/24406#issuecomment-1527747296
from @delvh , which presents a more reasonable approach. Based on this,
this PR will migrate all issue and pull request pin data from the
`issue` table to the `issue_pin` table. This change benefits larger
Gitea instances by improving scalability and performance.
---------
Co-authored-by: wxiaoguang <wxiaoguang@gmail.com>
1 week ago
|
|
|
"code.gitea.io/gitea/models/db"
|
|
|
|
issues_model "code.gitea.io/gitea/models/issues"
|
|
|
|
"code.gitea.io/gitea/modules/json"
|
|
|
|
"code.gitea.io/gitea/modules/log"
|
|
|
|
"code.gitea.io/gitea/services/context"
|
|
|
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
// IssuePinOrUnpin pin or unpin a Issue
|
|
|
|
func IssuePinOrUnpin(ctx *context.Context) {
|
|
|
|
issue := GetActionIssue(ctx)
|
|
|
|
if ctx.Written() {
|
|
|
|
return
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
// If we don't do this, it will crash when trying to add the pin event to the comment history
|
|
|
|
err := issue.LoadRepo(ctx)
|
|
|
|
if err != nil {
|
Move issue pin to an standalone table for querying performance (#33452)
Noticed a SQL in gitea.com has a bigger load. It seems both `is_pull`
and `pin_order` are not indexed columns in the database.
```SQL
SELECT `id`, `repo_id`, `index`, `poster_id`, `original_author`, `original_author_id`, `name`, `content`, `content_version`, `milestone_id`, `priority`, `is_closed`, `is_pull`, `num_comments`, `ref`, `pin_order`, `deadline_unix`, `created_unix`, `updated_unix`, `closed_unix`, `is_locked`, `time_estimate` FROM `issue` WHERE (repo_id =?) AND (is_pull = 0) AND (pin_order > 0) ORDER BY pin_order
```
I came across a comment
https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/24406#issuecomment-1527747296
from @delvh , which presents a more reasonable approach. Based on this,
this PR will migrate all issue and pull request pin data from the
`issue` table to the `issue_pin` table. This change benefits larger
Gitea instances by improving scalability and performance.
---------
Co-authored-by: wxiaoguang <wxiaoguang@gmail.com>
1 week ago
|
|
|
ctx.ServerError("LoadRepo", err)
|
|
|
|
return
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
Move issue pin to an standalone table for querying performance (#33452)
Noticed a SQL in gitea.com has a bigger load. It seems both `is_pull`
and `pin_order` are not indexed columns in the database.
```SQL
SELECT `id`, `repo_id`, `index`, `poster_id`, `original_author`, `original_author_id`, `name`, `content`, `content_version`, `milestone_id`, `priority`, `is_closed`, `is_pull`, `num_comments`, `ref`, `pin_order`, `deadline_unix`, `created_unix`, `updated_unix`, `closed_unix`, `is_locked`, `time_estimate` FROM `issue` WHERE (repo_id =?) AND (is_pull = 0) AND (pin_order > 0) ORDER BY pin_order
```
I came across a comment
https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/24406#issuecomment-1527747296
from @delvh , which presents a more reasonable approach. Based on this,
this PR will migrate all issue and pull request pin data from the
`issue` table to the `issue_pin` table. This change benefits larger
Gitea instances by improving scalability and performance.
---------
Co-authored-by: wxiaoguang <wxiaoguang@gmail.com>
1 week ago
|
|
|
// PinOrUnpin pins or unpins a Issue
|
|
|
|
_, err = issues_model.GetIssuePin(ctx, issue)
|
|
|
|
if err != nil && !db.IsErrNotExist(err) {
|
|
|
|
ctx.ServerError("GetIssuePin", err)
|
|
|
|
return
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
if db.IsErrNotExist(err) {
|
|
|
|
err = issues_model.PinIssue(ctx, issue, ctx.Doer)
|
|
|
|
} else {
|
|
|
|
err = issues_model.UnpinIssue(ctx, issue, ctx.Doer)
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
if err != nil {
|
Move issue pin to an standalone table for querying performance (#33452)
Noticed a SQL in gitea.com has a bigger load. It seems both `is_pull`
and `pin_order` are not indexed columns in the database.
```SQL
SELECT `id`, `repo_id`, `index`, `poster_id`, `original_author`, `original_author_id`, `name`, `content`, `content_version`, `milestone_id`, `priority`, `is_closed`, `is_pull`, `num_comments`, `ref`, `pin_order`, `deadline_unix`, `created_unix`, `updated_unix`, `closed_unix`, `is_locked`, `time_estimate` FROM `issue` WHERE (repo_id =?) AND (is_pull = 0) AND (pin_order > 0) ORDER BY pin_order
```
I came across a comment
https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/24406#issuecomment-1527747296
from @delvh , which presents a more reasonable approach. Based on this,
this PR will migrate all issue and pull request pin data from the
`issue` table to the `issue_pin` table. This change benefits larger
Gitea instances by improving scalability and performance.
---------
Co-authored-by: wxiaoguang <wxiaoguang@gmail.com>
1 week ago
|
|
|
if issues_model.IsErrIssueMaxPinReached(err) {
|
|
|
|
ctx.JSONError(ctx.Tr("repo.issues.max_pinned"))
|
|
|
|
} else {
|
|
|
|
ctx.ServerError("Pin/Unpin failed", err)
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
return
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ctx.JSONRedirect(issue.Link())
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
// IssueUnpin unpins a Issue
|
|
|
|
func IssueUnpin(ctx *context.Context) {
|
|
|
|
issue, err := issues_model.GetIssueByIndex(ctx, ctx.Repo.Repository.ID, ctx.PathParamInt64("index"))
|
|
|
|
if err != nil {
|
Move issue pin to an standalone table for querying performance (#33452)
Noticed a SQL in gitea.com has a bigger load. It seems both `is_pull`
and `pin_order` are not indexed columns in the database.
```SQL
SELECT `id`, `repo_id`, `index`, `poster_id`, `original_author`, `original_author_id`, `name`, `content`, `content_version`, `milestone_id`, `priority`, `is_closed`, `is_pull`, `num_comments`, `ref`, `pin_order`, `deadline_unix`, `created_unix`, `updated_unix`, `closed_unix`, `is_locked`, `time_estimate` FROM `issue` WHERE (repo_id =?) AND (is_pull = 0) AND (pin_order > 0) ORDER BY pin_order
```
I came across a comment
https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/24406#issuecomment-1527747296
from @delvh , which presents a more reasonable approach. Based on this,
this PR will migrate all issue and pull request pin data from the
`issue` table to the `issue_pin` table. This change benefits larger
Gitea instances by improving scalability and performance.
---------
Co-authored-by: wxiaoguang <wxiaoguang@gmail.com>
1 week ago
|
|
|
ctx.ServerError("GetIssueByIndex", err)
|
|
|
|
return
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
// If we don't do this, it will crash when trying to add the pin event to the comment history
|
|
|
|
err = issue.LoadRepo(ctx)
|
|
|
|
if err != nil {
|
Move issue pin to an standalone table for querying performance (#33452)
Noticed a SQL in gitea.com has a bigger load. It seems both `is_pull`
and `pin_order` are not indexed columns in the database.
```SQL
SELECT `id`, `repo_id`, `index`, `poster_id`, `original_author`, `original_author_id`, `name`, `content`, `content_version`, `milestone_id`, `priority`, `is_closed`, `is_pull`, `num_comments`, `ref`, `pin_order`, `deadline_unix`, `created_unix`, `updated_unix`, `closed_unix`, `is_locked`, `time_estimate` FROM `issue` WHERE (repo_id =?) AND (is_pull = 0) AND (pin_order > 0) ORDER BY pin_order
```
I came across a comment
https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/24406#issuecomment-1527747296
from @delvh , which presents a more reasonable approach. Based on this,
this PR will migrate all issue and pull request pin data from the
`issue` table to the `issue_pin` table. This change benefits larger
Gitea instances by improving scalability and performance.
---------
Co-authored-by: wxiaoguang <wxiaoguang@gmail.com>
1 week ago
|
|
|
ctx.ServerError("LoadRepo", err)
|
|
|
|
return
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
Move issue pin to an standalone table for querying performance (#33452)
Noticed a SQL in gitea.com has a bigger load. It seems both `is_pull`
and `pin_order` are not indexed columns in the database.
```SQL
SELECT `id`, `repo_id`, `index`, `poster_id`, `original_author`, `original_author_id`, `name`, `content`, `content_version`, `milestone_id`, `priority`, `is_closed`, `is_pull`, `num_comments`, `ref`, `pin_order`, `deadline_unix`, `created_unix`, `updated_unix`, `closed_unix`, `is_locked`, `time_estimate` FROM `issue` WHERE (repo_id =?) AND (is_pull = 0) AND (pin_order > 0) ORDER BY pin_order
```
I came across a comment
https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/24406#issuecomment-1527747296
from @delvh , which presents a more reasonable approach. Based on this,
this PR will migrate all issue and pull request pin data from the
`issue` table to the `issue_pin` table. This change benefits larger
Gitea instances by improving scalability and performance.
---------
Co-authored-by: wxiaoguang <wxiaoguang@gmail.com>
1 week ago
|
|
|
err = issues_model.UnpinIssue(ctx, issue, ctx.Doer)
|
|
|
|
if err != nil {
|
Move issue pin to an standalone table for querying performance (#33452)
Noticed a SQL in gitea.com has a bigger load. It seems both `is_pull`
and `pin_order` are not indexed columns in the database.
```SQL
SELECT `id`, `repo_id`, `index`, `poster_id`, `original_author`, `original_author_id`, `name`, `content`, `content_version`, `milestone_id`, `priority`, `is_closed`, `is_pull`, `num_comments`, `ref`, `pin_order`, `deadline_unix`, `created_unix`, `updated_unix`, `closed_unix`, `is_locked`, `time_estimate` FROM `issue` WHERE (repo_id =?) AND (is_pull = 0) AND (pin_order > 0) ORDER BY pin_order
```
I came across a comment
https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/24406#issuecomment-1527747296
from @delvh , which presents a more reasonable approach. Based on this,
this PR will migrate all issue and pull request pin data from the
`issue` table to the `issue_pin` table. This change benefits larger
Gitea instances by improving scalability and performance.
---------
Co-authored-by: wxiaoguang <wxiaoguang@gmail.com>
1 week ago
|
|
|
ctx.ServerError("UnpinIssue", err)
|
|
|
|
return
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ctx.Status(http.StatusNoContent)
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
// IssuePinMove moves a pinned Issue
|
|
|
|
func IssuePinMove(ctx *context.Context) {
|
|
|
|
if ctx.Doer == nil {
|
|
|
|
ctx.JSON(http.StatusForbidden, "Only signed in users are allowed to perform this action.")
|
|
|
|
return
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
type movePinIssueForm struct {
|
|
|
|
ID int64 `json:"id"`
|
|
|
|
Position int `json:"position"`
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
form := &movePinIssueForm{}
|
|
|
|
if err := json.NewDecoder(ctx.Req.Body).Decode(&form); err != nil {
|
Move issue pin to an standalone table for querying performance (#33452)
Noticed a SQL in gitea.com has a bigger load. It seems both `is_pull`
and `pin_order` are not indexed columns in the database.
```SQL
SELECT `id`, `repo_id`, `index`, `poster_id`, `original_author`, `original_author_id`, `name`, `content`, `content_version`, `milestone_id`, `priority`, `is_closed`, `is_pull`, `num_comments`, `ref`, `pin_order`, `deadline_unix`, `created_unix`, `updated_unix`, `closed_unix`, `is_locked`, `time_estimate` FROM `issue` WHERE (repo_id =?) AND (is_pull = 0) AND (pin_order > 0) ORDER BY pin_order
```
I came across a comment
https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/24406#issuecomment-1527747296
from @delvh , which presents a more reasonable approach. Based on this,
this PR will migrate all issue and pull request pin data from the
`issue` table to the `issue_pin` table. This change benefits larger
Gitea instances by improving scalability and performance.
---------
Co-authored-by: wxiaoguang <wxiaoguang@gmail.com>
1 week ago
|
|
|
ctx.ServerError("Decode", err)
|
|
|
|
return
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
issue, err := issues_model.GetIssueByID(ctx, form.ID)
|
|
|
|
if err != nil {
|
Move issue pin to an standalone table for querying performance (#33452)
Noticed a SQL in gitea.com has a bigger load. It seems both `is_pull`
and `pin_order` are not indexed columns in the database.
```SQL
SELECT `id`, `repo_id`, `index`, `poster_id`, `original_author`, `original_author_id`, `name`, `content`, `content_version`, `milestone_id`, `priority`, `is_closed`, `is_pull`, `num_comments`, `ref`, `pin_order`, `deadline_unix`, `created_unix`, `updated_unix`, `closed_unix`, `is_locked`, `time_estimate` FROM `issue` WHERE (repo_id =?) AND (is_pull = 0) AND (pin_order > 0) ORDER BY pin_order
```
I came across a comment
https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/24406#issuecomment-1527747296
from @delvh , which presents a more reasonable approach. Based on this,
this PR will migrate all issue and pull request pin data from the
`issue` table to the `issue_pin` table. This change benefits larger
Gitea instances by improving scalability and performance.
---------
Co-authored-by: wxiaoguang <wxiaoguang@gmail.com>
1 week ago
|
|
|
ctx.ServerError("GetIssueByID", err)
|
|
|
|
return
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
if issue.RepoID != ctx.Repo.Repository.ID {
|
|
|
|
ctx.Status(http.StatusNotFound)
|
|
|
|
log.Error("Issue does not belong to this repository")
|
|
|
|
return
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
Move issue pin to an standalone table for querying performance (#33452)
Noticed a SQL in gitea.com has a bigger load. It seems both `is_pull`
and `pin_order` are not indexed columns in the database.
```SQL
SELECT `id`, `repo_id`, `index`, `poster_id`, `original_author`, `original_author_id`, `name`, `content`, `content_version`, `milestone_id`, `priority`, `is_closed`, `is_pull`, `num_comments`, `ref`, `pin_order`, `deadline_unix`, `created_unix`, `updated_unix`, `closed_unix`, `is_locked`, `time_estimate` FROM `issue` WHERE (repo_id =?) AND (is_pull = 0) AND (pin_order > 0) ORDER BY pin_order
```
I came across a comment
https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/24406#issuecomment-1527747296
from @delvh , which presents a more reasonable approach. Based on this,
this PR will migrate all issue and pull request pin data from the
`issue` table to the `issue_pin` table. This change benefits larger
Gitea instances by improving scalability and performance.
---------
Co-authored-by: wxiaoguang <wxiaoguang@gmail.com>
1 week ago
|
|
|
err = issues_model.MovePin(ctx, issue, form.Position)
|
|
|
|
if err != nil {
|
Move issue pin to an standalone table for querying performance (#33452)
Noticed a SQL in gitea.com has a bigger load. It seems both `is_pull`
and `pin_order` are not indexed columns in the database.
```SQL
SELECT `id`, `repo_id`, `index`, `poster_id`, `original_author`, `original_author_id`, `name`, `content`, `content_version`, `milestone_id`, `priority`, `is_closed`, `is_pull`, `num_comments`, `ref`, `pin_order`, `deadline_unix`, `created_unix`, `updated_unix`, `closed_unix`, `is_locked`, `time_estimate` FROM `issue` WHERE (repo_id =?) AND (is_pull = 0) AND (pin_order > 0) ORDER BY pin_order
```
I came across a comment
https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/24406#issuecomment-1527747296
from @delvh , which presents a more reasonable approach. Based on this,
this PR will migrate all issue and pull request pin data from the
`issue` table to the `issue_pin` table. This change benefits larger
Gitea instances by improving scalability and performance.
---------
Co-authored-by: wxiaoguang <wxiaoguang@gmail.com>
1 week ago
|
|
|
ctx.ServerError("MovePin", err)
|
|
|
|
return
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ctx.Status(http.StatusNoContent)
|
|
|
|
}
|