Skip to content

increase bedes field sizes migration and update mapping #166

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

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Apr 13, 2022

Conversation

kflemin
Copy link
Contributor

@kflemin kflemin commented Apr 12, 2022

Fixes #165

@kflemin kflemin requested a review from nllong April 12, 2022 17:56
@coveralls
Copy link

coveralls commented Apr 12, 2022

Pull Request Test Coverage Report for Build 2163382924

  • 11 of 11 (100.0%) changed or added relevant lines in 2 files are covered.
  • 11 unchanged lines in 1 file lost coverage.
  • Overall coverage decreased (-0.5%) to 82.746%

Files with Coverage Reduction New Missed Lines %
bsyncviewer/views.py 11 47.92%
Totals Coverage Status
Change from base Build 2163381780: -0.5%
Covered Lines: 1832
Relevant Lines: 2214

💛 - Coveralls

content_uuid = models.CharField(max_length=200, unique=True)
term = models.CharField(max_length=200)
category = models.CharField(max_length=200)
url = models.CharField(max_length=400)
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

nice! We should really keep these multiples of base 2, just because, haha. 256, 512, etc. next time, 🤓

@nllong nllong merged commit b48dea1 into develop Apr 13, 2022
@nllong nllong deleted the bedes-field-sizes branch April 13, 2022 20:41
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.

Increase database field sizes to support bedes composite terms
3 participants