Expose whether a room is a space in the Admin API

[lukasdenk]

Closes #11904.

Signed-off by: Lukas Denk, [email protected]

Pull Request Checklist

• Pull request is based on the develop branch
• Pull request includes a changelog file. The entry should:
  • Be a short description of your change which makes sense to users. "Fixed a bug that prevented receiving messages from other servers." instead of "Moved X method from EventStore to EventWorkerStore.".
  • Use markdown where necessary, mostly for code blocks.
  • End with either a period (.) or an exclamation mark (!).
  • Start with a capital letter.
  • Feel free to credit yourself, by adding a sentence "Contributed by @github_username." or "Contributed by [Your Name]." to the end of the entry.
• Pull request includes a sign off
• Code style is correct
  (run the linters)

[dklimpel]

This is a comparison of costs on my small database for get_rooms_paginate.
It seems to be a big growth. I think we need some discussion to this: #11904 (comment)

explain
SELECT state.room_id, state.name, state.canonical_alias, curr.joined_members,
  curr.local_users_in_room, rooms.room_version, rooms.creator,
  state.encryption, state.is_federatable, rooms.is_public, state.join_rules,
  state.guest_access, state.history_visibility, curr.current_state_events
FROM room_stats_state state
INNER JOIN room_stats_current curr USING (room_id)
INNER JOIN rooms USING (room_id);
                                      QUERY PLAN
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Hash Join  (cost=11.31..16.20 rows=112 width=218)
   Hash Cond: (state.room_id = curr.room_id)
   ->  Hash Join  (cost=5.57..10.14 rows=114 width=262)
         Hash Cond: (state.room_id = rooms.room_id)
         ->  Seq Scan on room_stats_state state  (cost=0.00..4.24 rows=124 width=159)
         ->  Hash  (cost=4.14..4.14 rows=114 width=103)
               ->  Seq Scan on rooms  (cost=0.00..4.14 rows=114 width=103)
   ->  Hash  (cost=4.22..4.22 rows=122 width=67)
         ->  Seq Scan on room_stats_current curr  (cost=0.00..4.22 rows=122 width=67)

explain
SELECT state.room_id, state.name, state.canonical_alias, curr.joined_members,
  curr.local_users_in_room, rooms.room_version, rooms.creator,
  state.encryption, state.is_federatable, rooms.is_public, state.join_rules,
  state.guest_access, state.history_visibility, curr.current_state_events,
  json.json
FROM room_stats_state state
INNER JOIN room_stats_current curr USING (room_id)
INNER JOIN rooms USING (room_id)
INNER JOIN event_json json USING (room_id)
INNER JOIN state_events events USING (event_id);
                                              QUERY PLAN
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Hash Join  (cost=639.49..5749.86 rows=8125 width=1289)
   Hash Cond: (state.room_id = curr.room_id)
   ->  Hash Join  (cost=633.74..5721.66 rows=8270 width=1389)
         Hash Cond: (state.room_id = rooms.room_id)
         ->  Hash Join  (cost=628.18..5691.67 rows=8995 width=1286)
               Hash Cond: (json.room_id = state.room_id)
               ->  Hash Join  (cost=622.39..5661.45 rows=8995 width=1127)
                     Hash Cond: (json.event_id = events.event_id)
                     ->  Seq Scan on event_json json  (cost=0.00..4982.49 rows=21549 width=1172)
                     ->  Hash  (cost=509.95..509.95 rows=8995 width=45)
                           ->  Seq Scan on state_events events  (cost=0.00..509.95 rows=8995 width=45)
               ->  Hash  (cost=4.24..4.24 rows=124 width=159)
                     ->  Seq Scan on room_stats_state state  (cost=0.00..4.24 rows=124 width=159)
         ->  Hash  (cost=4.14..4.14 rows=114 width=103)
               ->  Seq Scan on rooms  (cost=0.00..4.14 rows=114 width=103)
   ->  Hash  (cost=4.22..4.22 rows=122 width=67)
         ->  Seq Scan on room_stats_current curr  (cost=0.00..4.22 rows=122 width=67)

[lukasdenk]

@dklimpel I guess, one should more efficiently store the room type when the room is created. However, I did not dare such a big change.

[lukasdenk]

Also, this would not be downwards compatible

[dklimpel]

IMO it is possible to do this downwards compatible. But then it is not a "good first issue".
You need:

• a database update to extend the table with a new column
• update the function, which writes new rooms to database
• a background job to update database for all existing / old rooms

[lukasdenk]

Ok, maybe I will do so in a month or so. I am a student and currently we have exam phase.

[lukasdenk]

I think I won't have time to work on this.