On Jul 28, 2006, at 2:04 PM, Marcel Molina Jr. wrote:
On Fri, Jul 28, 2006 at 01:07:59PM -0700, Bob Silva wrote:
I'm curious to know if "dirty" checking was considered during the
design
process of AR. It would add performance benefits (configurable?)
for larger
tables and associations in a write heavy environment especially if
you have
text or blob fields in your tables. Anyone care to PDI this as a
plugin?
As I remember it, about a year ago Jeremy Kemper implemented dirty
column
tracking and decided against it for reasons I forget. Something
wasn't right
in the cosmos though.
The other way to do dirty checking is to do it on an object basis,
instead of by columns. I'd love to be able to track what associated
objects had been modified so that when I save an order, all the line
items that got modified get saved too. Then of course I'll want an
identity map in AR so that I don't have multiple, possibly
inconsistent model objects floating around for just one record. I
think I can see a good way to do the identity map, but only the
vaguest idea of how AR might save dirtied children automatically.
Would these things be PDI-level enhancements, or a waste of time to
look into?
--
Josh Susser
http://blog.hasmanythrough.com
_______________________________________________
Rails-core mailing list
Rails-core@lists.rubyonrails.org
http://lists.rubyonrails.org/mailman/listinfo/rails-core
