feat: CREATE INDEX CONCURRENTLY for "userId" "id" composite note index if admin wish. (#15915)

* chore: CREATE INDEX CONCURRENTLY for "userId" "id" composite note index

* chore: remove { concurrent: true } and comment why

* update comment

* feat: add MISSKEY_MIGRATION_CREATE_INDEX_CONCURRENTLY option

* fix: spdx license header

* alter comment

* chore: improve behavior when migration failure

* docs(changelog): 2025.4.1 で追加されたインデックスの再生成をノートの追加しながら行えるようになりました

* ちょっと表現を変更

---------

Co-authored-by: 饺子w (Yumechi) <35571479+eternal-flame-ad@users.noreply.github.com>
This commit is contained in:
anatawa12 2025-05-03 12:57:50 +09:00 committed by GitHub
parent d25af911cf
commit 1af98b690b
No known key found for this signature in database
GPG key ID: B5690EEEBB952194
6 changed files with 49 additions and 4 deletions

View file

@ -10,6 +10,16 @@ import { MiUser } from './User.js';
import { MiChannel } from './Channel.js';
import type { MiDriveFile } from './DriveFile.js';
// Note: When you create a new index for existing column of this table,
// it might be better to index concurrently under isConcurrentIndexMigrationEnabled flag
// by editing generated migration file since this table is very large,
// and it will make a long lock to create index in most cases.
// Please note that `CREATE INDEX CONCURRENTLY` is not supported in transaction,
// so you need to set `transaction = false` in migration if isConcurrentIndexMigrationEnabled() is true.
// Please refer 1745378064470-composite-note-index.js for example.
// You should not use `@Index({ concurrent: true })` decorator because database initialization for test will fail
// because it will always run CREATE INDEX in transaction based on decorators.
// Not appending `{ concurrent: true }` to `@Index` will not cause any problem in production,
@Index(['userId', 'id'])
@Entity('note')
export class MiNote {