Merge pull request #2671 from matrix-org/rav/room_list_fixes
Reshuffle room list request code
This commit is contained in:
commit
008aa2fc6d
|
@ -154,6 +154,8 @@ class RoomListHandler(BaseHandler):
|
|||
# We want larger rooms to be first, hence negating num_joined_users
|
||||
rooms_to_order_value[room_id] = (-num_joined_users, room_id)
|
||||
|
||||
logger.info("Getting ordering for %i rooms since %s",
|
||||
len(room_ids), stream_token)
|
||||
yield concurrently_execute(get_order_for_room, room_ids, 10)
|
||||
|
||||
sorted_entries = sorted(rooms_to_order_value.items(), key=lambda e: e[1])
|
||||
|
@ -181,34 +183,42 @@ class RoomListHandler(BaseHandler):
|
|||
rooms_to_scan = rooms_to_scan[:since_token.current_limit]
|
||||
rooms_to_scan.reverse()
|
||||
|
||||
# Actually generate the entries. _append_room_entry_to_chunk will append to
|
||||
# chunk but will stop if len(chunk) > limit
|
||||
chunk = []
|
||||
if limit and not search_filter:
|
||||
logger.info("After sorting and filtering, %i rooms remain",
|
||||
len(rooms_to_scan))
|
||||
|
||||
# _append_room_entry_to_chunk will append to chunk but will stop if
|
||||
# len(chunk) > limit
|
||||
#
|
||||
# Normally we will generate enough results on the first iteration here,
|
||||
# but if there is a search filter, _append_room_entry_to_chunk may
|
||||
# filter some results out, in which case we loop again.
|
||||
#
|
||||
# We don't want to scan over the entire range either as that
|
||||
# would potentially waste a lot of work.
|
||||
#
|
||||
# XXX if there is no limit, we may end up DoSing the server with
|
||||
# calls to get_current_state_ids for every single room on the
|
||||
# server. Surely we should cap this somehow?
|
||||
#
|
||||
if limit:
|
||||
step = limit + 1
|
||||
for i in xrange(0, len(rooms_to_scan), step):
|
||||
# We iterate here because the vast majority of cases we'll stop
|
||||
# at first iteration, but occaisonally _append_room_entry_to_chunk
|
||||
# won't append to the chunk and so we need to loop again.
|
||||
# We don't want to scan over the entire range either as that
|
||||
# would potentially waste a lot of work.
|
||||
yield concurrently_execute(
|
||||
lambda r: self._append_room_entry_to_chunk(
|
||||
r, rooms_to_num_joined[r],
|
||||
chunk, limit, search_filter
|
||||
),
|
||||
rooms_to_scan[i:i + step], 10
|
||||
)
|
||||
if len(chunk) >= limit + 1:
|
||||
break
|
||||
else:
|
||||
step = len(rooms_to_scan)
|
||||
|
||||
chunk = []
|
||||
for i in xrange(0, len(rooms_to_scan), step):
|
||||
batch = rooms_to_scan[i:i + step]
|
||||
logger.info("Processing %i rooms for result", len(batch))
|
||||
yield concurrently_execute(
|
||||
lambda r: self._append_room_entry_to_chunk(
|
||||
r, rooms_to_num_joined[r],
|
||||
chunk, limit, search_filter
|
||||
),
|
||||
rooms_to_scan, 5
|
||||
batch, 5,
|
||||
)
|
||||
logger.info("Now %i rooms in result", len(chunk))
|
||||
if len(chunk) >= limit + 1:
|
||||
break
|
||||
|
||||
chunk.sort(key=lambda e: (-e["num_joined_members"], e["room_id"]))
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue