-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 76
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: implement curp wal storage #687
Conversation
71d1c79
to
25af141
Compare
bd42b0f
to
0b5505d
Compare
@bsbds Convert your pr to draft since CI failed |
@bsbds Convert your pr to draft since CI failed |
@bsbds Convert your pr to draft since CI failed |
@bsbds Convert your pr to draft since CI failed |
@bsbds Convert your pr to draft since CI failed |
@bsbds Convert your pr to draft since CI failed |
@Mergifyio rebase |
✅ Branch has been successfully rebased |
25ca007
to
ea1b72d
Compare
@bsbds Your PR is in conflict and cannot be merged. |
Codecov ReportAttention: Patch coverage is
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #687 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 75.55% 75.73% +0.17%
==========================================
Files 180 192 +12
Lines 26938 28121 +1183
Branches 26938 28121 +1183
==========================================
+ Hits 20353 21297 +944
- Misses 5366 5506 +140
- Partials 1219 1318 +99 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
1d1c293
to
d20163c
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.
Please squash these commits into one
Signed-off-by: bsbds <[email protected]> refactor: wal storage Signed-off-by: bsbds <[email protected]>
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.
LGTM
Depends-On: #740
Please briefly answer these questions:
what problem are you trying to solve? (or if there's no problem, what's the motivation for this change?)
This is part of the wal implementation, which implements the WAL storage type
what changes does this pull request make?
are there any non-obvious implications of these changes? (does it break compatibility with previous versions, etc)