On 2 October 2014 01:31, Kapil Thangavelu <[email protected]> wrote:
> it feels a little strange to use a mutable object for an immutable field. > that said it does seem functional. although the immutability speaks to the > first disadvantage noted for the separate fields namely becoming out of > sync, which afaics isn't something that's possible with the current model, > ie. a change of name needs to generate a new doc. Names (previous _id) are > unique in usage minus the extant bug that unit ids are reused. even without > that the benefits to avoiding the duplicate doc data and manual parse on > every _id seem like clear wins for subdoc _ids. > Just to be really sure, I added a test that exercises the case of one of the _id fields changing. See TestAttemptedIdUpdate in the (just updated) gist. MongoDB stops us from doing anything stupid (as expected).
-- Juju-dev mailing list [email protected] Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju-dev
