Actually scratch that patch I sent over. I see the trick now that makes the existing approach quite good. I think I can make a version that preserves that trick and still streamlines the processing. I will benchmark and report back if successful.
On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 3:20 PM, Sean Owen <[email protected]> wrote: > Sorry, typo, that's what I meant. yes the difference isn't *that* large! > It may be worse in practice since you have a few users with very many prefs. > It may also be beneficial to simply have one fewer phase and throw > around less data. I will also try to benchmark since really that's the > only way to know. >
