Skip to content
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

TRUNK-6162: Speed up startup by eliminating redundant calls to getUnrunDatabaseChanges #4572

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

wikumChamith
Copy link
Member

Description of what I changed

This introduces caching for the getUnrunDatabaseChanges method to improve performance.

Issue I worked on

see https://openmrs.atlassian.net/browse/TRUNK-6162

Checklist: I completed these to help reviewers :)

  • My IDE is configured to follow the code style of this project.

    No? Unsure? -> configure your IDE, format the code and add the changes with git add . && git commit --amend

  • I have added tests to cover my changes. (If you refactored
    existing code that was well tested you do not have to add tests)

    No? -> write tests and add them to this commit git add . && git commit --amend

  • I ran mvn clean package right before creating this pull request and
    added all formatting changes to my commit.

    No? -> execute above command

  • All new and existing tests passed.

    No? -> figure out why and add the fix to your commit. It is your responsibility to make sure your code works.

  • My pull request is based on the latest changes of the master branch.

    No? Unsure? -> execute command git pull --rebase upstream master

…unDatabaseChanges

This introduces caching for the getUnrunDatabaseChanges method to improve performance.
@ibacher
Copy link
Member

ibacher commented Aug 1, 2024

@wikumChamith Apologies... I missed this one. Could you resolve the conflict? This seems like an important change!

@wikumChamith
Copy link
Member Author

@ibacher looks like this has changed a lot after the Liquibase 4.27.0 upgrade. Should we continue with this?

cc: @dkayiwa

@ibacher
Copy link
Member

ibacher commented Aug 2, 2024

No, you're right. That does appear to have made things redundant. Fair enough.

@ibacher ibacher closed this Aug 2, 2024
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.

2 participants