> Basically, the options are:
> 1. Revert the patch that introduced the regression - it wasn't
> properly +1d in the first place
> 2. Use a regex to replace the count term originating from the
> association's :select, turning it back into COUNT(*)
> 3. Use a regex to replace the count term originating from the
> association's :select, turning it into COUNT(tablename.primary_key)
>
> I personally favor the last because I think that's what we'll want to
> be using everywhere long term, but there are reasonable arguments for
> the other two also.
>
> Thoughts?

Part of me can't go past:

  Some people, when confronted with a problem, think “I know, I'll use
regular expressions.”   Now they have two problems.

I'm pretty much in favour of #1 for 2-3-stable and investigating 2 or
3 for master.  Barring any objections I'll revert it today and we can
keep tinkering in master.  Now my month of conference travel is almost
over I'm pretty keen to focus on getting a point release out.

-- 
Cheers

Koz

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby 
on Rails: Core" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to