I was in a hurry writing the previous email and realized that I did not specify that the relationship type was COMPOSITION.
On Fri, Jun 1, 2018 at 2:37 PM, Pierre Padovani < [email protected]> wrote: > All, > > I decided to spend a few cycles performing from basic performance tests to > help us refine our type system. The goal was to determine how we would add > relationships to our entities and if we would use the new relationship APIs > or not. The test was simple. I created a type called container and a type > called child both extending DataSet. I think created an instance of > container, and added one child at a time to the container recording the > cost of the add, and the cost of fetching the container after each add. > > There were three tests run: > > - Legacy - Assign the entities to the attributes in the attribute map > - Hybrid - Leave the legacy attributes in the type system, and use the > relationship APIs > - V2 - Remove the legacy attributes and use the relationship APIs > > Here are the results for 100 children: > > > > Is there a reason we are continuing to use legacy attributes in the type > system(s) we are shipping with Atlas? From a performance perspective this > does not seem like a reasonable thing to do. > > Thanks! > > Pierre > >
