BUG: only return data available in both DB and S3 - #962
Merged
Conversation
Contributor
|
Shouldn't we be concerned when files records exist in the db but are not in s3? |
Contributor
Author
I think so. I am concerned about that but this feels like a bug to me. |
Contributor
Ok I see what you mean. The query should truly reflect whats in s3. |
lacoak21
approved these changes
Oct 22, 2025
Contributor
Author
|
Let me merge this and tests. My test environment both local and Git is down. Will open another PR if this didn't work. |
Collaborator
|
I don't like this because it is adding a lot of HEAD_OBJECT checks unnecessarily. We should add a synchronizer or run the synchronizer whenever we do these updates. |
This file contains hidden or 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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
3 participants
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
Change Summary
Overview
Bug fix in query API that returns file that are not both in DB or S3