fix(DB): Ignore intentionally missing fs_storage_path_prefix index on PostgreSQL#58734
Merged
provokateurin merged 1 commit intomasterfrom Apr 20, 2026
Merged
Conversation
Member
Author
|
/backport to stable33 |
Member
Author
|
/backport to stable32 |
provokateurin
force-pushed
the
fix/db/postgres-filecache-path-prefix-index
branch
from
5728f78 to
0e89319
Compare
… PostgreSQL Signed-off-by: provokateurin <kate@provokateurin.de>
provokateurin
force-pushed
the
fix/db/postgres-filecache-path-prefix-index
branch
from
0e89319 to
8ae9424
Compare
CarlSchwan
approved these changes
Mar 5, 2026
leftybournes
approved these changes
Apr 20, 2026
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
4 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
The index is not created on PostgreSQL in the migration:
server/core/Migrations/Version13000Date20170718121200.php
Lines 243 to 245 in c29c702
Any new instance with PostgreSQL shows a warning for this missing index.
When the index was added in #28541 it was correctly excluded, but the condition got lost in some refactoring.