📝 docs: S3-compatible object storage backend design (#481)#504
Open
vaayne wants to merge 1 commit into
Open
Conversation
…481) Design proposal scoping #481 to the durable blob tier (uploads, attachments, articles, exported artifacts) rather than the sandbox filesystem, which requires POSIX semantics S3 cannot provide. Covers the objstore abstraction, opaque key naming, access control, sign-or-proxy download, config, and migration. No code yet.
📊 Coverage ReportTotal coverage: 48.6% (generated files excluded) Per-package breakdown |
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
1 participant
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
What
A design proposal doc (EN + ZH) for an S3-compatible object storage backend, under
web/content/docs/development/object-storage.md. No implementation code — this is the plan for review.Why
#481 asks to add S3-compatible storage for persistent files. Taken literally that reads as "swap local FS for S3," which is a category error: Stella's sandbox needs real POSIX semantics (in-place read/write via tools, mise, git) that S3 cannot provide. The doc reframes the scope to the part that multi-replica deployments actually break — the durable blob tier — and leaves the sandbox tier to #477 / K8s.
How
data/assets/, email attachments, knowledge-base articles, exported artifacts); sandbox working trees /.mise-tools/ skill mirror stay on local FS.internal/objstore.Storeinterface, two backends —local(default) ands3via minio-go (uniform across AWS S3 / MinIO / R2).objects/{tenant}/{uuid-or-sha256}; filenames/owner/content-type in ablob_objectDB table, never in the key.storagesection,localzero-config default.stella storage migrateCLI, idempotent.Refs