-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 174
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
Version Cache #6989
Version Cache #6989
Conversation
No full review but to not forget this: I wanted to suggest to use it in |
@distantnative it's a problem that not all actions go through the Version and Storage classes yet. This is quite a good example for that. I think we really need to go through all the model actions again and check for parts where this could happen. |
c1ca9d5
to
aae3c87
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'm a bit torn whether I like this global cache instead of model-specific. And sometimes we try to remove/add specific models, sometimes we just hard reset. Doesn't feel fully elegant. But maybe it's an easier compromise to do it that broad.
To be honest, this has been the approach that felt most straight forward to me. I agree that it is not super elegant though. It is 100% internal though. If you want to give it a go to build a model-based version, that'd be great. But otherwise I think the main objective is to get it done for v5. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Probably indeed the most pragmatic approach right now.
c8f5db3
to
94c72c3
Compare
1de9e66
to
c56b914
Compare
Description
Todos
Summary of changes
Changelog
Enhancements
Breaking changes
None
Docs
Ready?
For review team