-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.3k
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
Fix LiteFileStream.SetReadStreamPosition #2459
Conversation
What version can use this fix? |
Looking at the git blame, should be valid for basically any version from the last five years or so, though you'd have to apply the commit from my branch to that version. There's no released version with it, so no matter what you'd have to build it yourself. |
int loadedChunk = _currentChunkIndex; | ||
int newChunkIndex = 0; | ||
while (seekStreamPosition <= _streamPosition) { | ||
if (!_chunkLengths.ContainsKey(newChunkIndex)) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Missing an opportunity of using trygetvalue ;)
I would like to see some unitttests for this pr as i currently don't fully understand the issue. |
@@ -23,6 +24,7 @@ public partial class LiteFileStream<TFileId> : Stream | |||
private byte[] _currentChunkData = null; | |||
private int _positionInChunk = 0; | |||
private MemoryStream _buffer; | |||
private Dictionary<int, long> _chunkLengths = new Dictionary<int, long>(); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Not trying to force you change this, but are you sure sure separating fields from their main use is a good idea? I mean if it would be used by many different partials, this would imo the best place but you are only using it in the .Read
partial.
What do you think? Does that make sense?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Not a big deal to me, whatever works best with the style for the repository.
seekStreamPosition += _currentChunkData.Length; | ||
} | ||
newChunkIndex++; | ||
} |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
While you are at it, add a new line here
Thank you for your contribution and bearing with me :D |
Fix for issue #2458. Not a great solution, since it makes seeking much more expensive, but it works in my situation. I don't think there's a way to make it significantly faster without making chunks uniform length, which would require changes on the write side and not work for existing databases.