LFS support to be stored on minio#12518
Conversation
be7ea1f to
11775dd
Compare
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #12518 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 43.30% 43.26% -0.04%
==========================================
Files 647 648 +1
Lines 71800 71886 +86
==========================================
+ Hits 31090 31099 +9
- Misses 35675 35745 +70
- Partials 5035 5042 +7
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is there really no way to make these self-register?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't know. But the current codes look clear and simple.
d9d237c to
8e5d574
Compare
|
Do we really need duplicate minio configuration for each type of data stored in it? Should different buckets would not be enaugh |
|
@lafriks some users may wish to use cheaper s3 providers for avatars, and then more robust s3 provider for LFS |
|
@lafriks I will send another PR to add a |
|
hmm... I'm wondering if we'd be better off calving off the storage options into: [storage] ; this is the default storage option
TYPE=local
PATH=/data ; specific storage will inherit from this as a subpath
[storage.attachments]
TYPE=local; minio or the like
; PATH would default to [storage] PATH/attachments
... ; specific storage content config
[storage.lfs]
TYPE=local; minio or the like
... ; specific storage content config
...Then we can move the specific configuration to the storage module and do something like queues configuration stuff. |
|
@zeripath Yes, that's my next PR. But I will only add |
8e5d574 to
b6580de
Compare
As a next step of #11387, Fix #5530