Skip to content

Conversation

@liori
Copy link
Contributor

@liori liori commented Jan 7, 2024

What: a blueprint document with a design of a low I/O piece storage

Why: to start discussion

Please describe the tests: just a blueprint, none needed.

Please describe the performance impact: just a blueprint document.

Code Review Checklist (to be filled out by reviewer)

  • NEW: Are there any Satellite database migrations? Are they forwards and backwards compatible?
  • Does the PR describe what changes are being made?
  • Does the PR describe why the changes are being made?
  • Does the code follow our style guide?
  • Does the code follow our testing guide?
  • Is the PR appropriately sized? (If it could be broken into smaller PRs it should be)
  • Does the new code have enough tests? (every PR should have tests or justification otherwise. Bug-fix PRs especially)
  • Does the new code have enough documentation that answers "how do I use it?" and "what does it do?"? (both source documentation and higher level, diagrams?)
  • Does any documentation need updating?
  • Do the database access patterns make sense?

Change-Id: I34b5c468271ef6128cb83f8ee42efb30efda4102
@cla-bot
Copy link

cla-bot bot commented Jan 7, 2024

Thank you for your pull request and welcome to our community. We require contributors to sign our new Contributor License Agreement v2, and we don't seem to have the users @liori on file. Once you have signed the CLA, please let us know, so we can manually review and add you to the approved contributors list.

@storjrobot
Copy link

This pull request has been mentioned on Storj Community Forum (official). There might be relevant details there:

https://forum.storj.io/t/design-draft-a-low-i-o-piece-storage/24864/1

@egonelbre
Copy link
Member

Note, we've recently moved all blueprints to https://github.com/storj/design-docs repository.

@ifraixedes
Copy link
Member

@liori do you mind canceling this PR and opening one in https://github.com/storj/design-docs?

There are some conventions to follow, but for now, doing a preliminary review should be fine, I don't want you to spend time on that matter until the initial reviewers see it as a viable solution.

Thank you for your contribution!

@liori
Copy link
Contributor Author

liori commented Jan 14, 2024

Moved as suggested: storj/design-docs#13

@liori liori closed this Jan 14, 2024
@storjrobot
Copy link

This pull request has been mentioned on Storj Community Forum (official). There might be relevant details there:

https://forum.storj.io/t/best-filesystem-for-storj/24784/55

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants