refactor: use mvi filter fields for get/delete items #434
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Because we will allow filter expressions, the hit/miss response pattern no longer makes sense for `get item batch` and `get item metadata batch`. In this commit we transition away from hit/miss and just use a sequence of found items.
malandis
commented
Feb 9, 2024
anitarua
approved these changes
Feb 9, 2024
malandis
deleted the
refactor/use-mvi-filter-fields-for-get-and-delete
branch
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
We are in the process of migrating MVI
delete item batch,get item batch, andget item metadata batchto use a filter expression to select items to delete (get) as opposed to a list of id's. For convenience, we will still allow users to select items with a list of id's from the top level methods. This PR migrates the backend.As part of the migration we are also moving away from the hit/miss pattern for
get item batchandget item metadata batchresponse messages. While the hit/miss pattern made sense for when we only selected items by id, it no longer makes sense for when a user supplies a general filter expression. What's more, previously when we read the hit/miss responses, we built a dictionary containing only the hits, so the distinction wasn't as important.In future PRs we will add overloads to also use a filter expression from delete and get item methods.