Colin Law wrote: >> Amen. �But since mine is a table containing >700K 18-column records of >> unchanging data, I'm not giving up without a fight. > > Why is that a reason for having it in a separate db? > > Colin
Um, because I'm lazy? :) One table in the external database contains 'highly decorated time records' with 15 minute granularity. Many of my other models depend on this table, and my unit tests are greatly simplified since I know the table is always available, precomputed and fully tested. Since the test database is always rolled back between each test, consider the alternative: I'd have to recompute a subset of the time records before each test I run, and (a) that slows things down and (b) it makes my head hurt trying to figure out which ones I'd need to generate in advance of the test. (I can hear Marnen chuckling in the background right about now...) I am now thinking about keeping keeping it as a table in a separate database, but "broadside loading" it into the _development or _test database as a rake task using straight SQL commands when needed. That might not be so painful. - ff -- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Talk" 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-talk?hl=en.
