[codex] add object storage provider benchmark post#7985
Merged
Conversation
|
The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for GitHub.
|
|
The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Argos notifications ↗︎
|
Contributor
|
No actionable comments were generated in the recent review. 🎉 ℹ️ Recent review info⚙️ Run configurationConfiguration used: Path: .coderabbit.yaml Review profile: CHILL Plan: Pro Run ID: ⛔ Files ignored due to path filters (2)
📒 Files selected for processing (1)
✅ Files skipped from review due to trivial changes (1)
WalkthroughAdds a new MDX blog post titled "Evaluating Object Storage Providers for Prisma Compute" (dated 2026-06-26). The article covers the Evaluating Object Storage Providers Blog Post
🎯 1 (Trivial) | ⏱️ ~5 minutes 🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 5✅ Passed checks (5 passed)
Comment |
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
🤖 Prompt for all review comments with AI agents
Verify each finding against current code. Fix only still-valid issues, skip the
rest with a brief reason, keep changes minimal, and validate.
Inline comments:
In
`@apps/blog/content/blog/evaluating-object-storage-providers-for-prisma-compute/index.mdx`:
- Around line 128-132: The conclusion is too broad for the benchmark data
described in this section. In the paragraph mentioning accelerated-fs and Prisma
Compute, narrow the wording so it only claims Tigris is the better fit for the
tested object-storage workload and sampled regions, rather than for the entire
Prisma Compute platform; keep the rest of the benchmark interpretation aligned
with the measured small-object latency and throughput results.
🪄 Autofix (Beta)
Fix all unresolved CodeRabbit comments on this PR:
- Push a commit to this branch (recommended)
- Create a new PR with the fixes
ℹ️ Review info
⚙️ Run configuration
Configuration used: Path: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
Run ID: b92462b3-113a-48aa-931c-e2a9531db8eb
⛔ Files ignored due to path filters (7)
apps/blog/public/evaluating-object-storage-providers-for-prisma-compute/imgs/benchmark-setup.svgis excluded by!**/*.svgapps/blog/public/evaluating-object-storage-providers-for-prisma-compute/imgs/bulk-throughput.svgis excluded by!**/*.svgapps/blog/public/evaluating-object-storage-providers-for-prisma-compute/imgs/hero.pngis excluded by!**/*.pngapps/blog/public/evaluating-object-storage-providers-for-prisma-compute/imgs/latency-distributions.svgis excluded by!**/*.svgapps/blog/public/evaluating-object-storage-providers-for-prisma-compute/imgs/meta.pngis excluded by!**/*.pngapps/blog/public/evaluating-object-storage-providers-for-prisma-compute/imgs/mixed-latency-chart.svgis excluded by!**/*.svgapps/blog/public/evaluating-object-storage-providers-for-prisma-compute/imgs/starlink-mixed-chart.svgis excluded by!**/*.svg
📒 Files selected for processing (1)
apps/blog/content/blog/evaluating-object-storage-providers-for-prisma-compute/index.mdx
ankur-arch
reviewed
Jun 30, 2026
…age post - Replace photographic hero.png with an on-brand comparison-card hero.svg (Tigris vs R2 mixed-phase timings) and regenerate meta.png; switch frontmatter to hero.svg to match the Compute series - Remove all em dashes, cut redundancy, and tighten prose for readability - Fix 50MB -> 50 MiB and drop the duplicated in-body hero image - Cross-link Prisma Compute (docs + public beta), AWS Lambda, and Bun - Address review: shorten the Starlink wrap-up (Ankur) and narrow the conclusion to accelerated-fs rather than the whole platform (CodeRabbit) Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
nurul3101
approved these changes
Jun 30, 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
3 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.
What changed
Why
The draft evaluates Cloudflare R2 and Tigris for Prisma Compute using the
accelerated-fsworkload. The post makes the benchmark results easier to read with inline charts and keeps the claims scoped to the measured latency-sensitive filesystem workload.Validation
pnpm --filter blog types:checkhttp://localhost:3002/blog/evaluating-object-storage-providers-for-prisma-computefor title, author, series marker, generated hero image, Mermaid diagram, and both SVG charts.Notes
The local dev page shows unrelated analytics/cookie-script errors in browser logs on localhost, but the post content and assets render correctly.
Summary by CodeRabbit